Development and validation of a checklist for use with automatically generated radiotherapy plans
Authors:
Open Access
- 30 June 2022
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics
- Vol. 23 (9) , e13694
Abstract
Purpose: To develop a checklist that improves the rate of error detection during the plan review of automatically generated radiotherapy plans.Methods: A custom checklist was developed using guidance from American Association of Physicists in Medicine task groups 275 and 315 and the results of a failure modes and effects analysis of the Radiation Planning Assistant (RPA), an automated contouring and treatment planning tool. The preliminary checklist contained 90 review items for each automatically generated plan. In the first study, eight physicists were recruited from our institution who were familiar with the RPA. Each physicist reviewed 10 artificial intelligence‐generated resident treatment plans from the RPA for safety and plan quality, five of which contained errors. Physicists performed plan checks, recorded errors, and rated each plan's clinical acceptability. Following a 2‐week break, physicists reviewed 10 additional plans with a similar distribution of errors using our customized checklist. Participants then provided feedback on the usability of the checklist and it was modified accordingly. In a second study, this process was repeated with 14 senior medical physics residents who were randomly assigned to checklist or no checklist for their reviews. Each reviewed 10 plans, five of which contained errors, and completed the corresponding survey.Results: In the first study, the checklist significantly improved the rate of error detection from 3.4 ± 1.1 to 4.4 ± 0.74 errors per participant without and with the checklist, respectively (p = 0.02). Error detection increased by 20% when the custom checklist was utilized. In the second study, 2.9 ± 0.84 and 3.5 ± 0.84 errors per participant were detected without and with the revised checklist, respectively (p = 0.08). Despite the lack of statistical significance for this cohort, error detection increased by 18% when the checklist was utilized.Conclusion: Our results indicate that the use of a customized checklist when reviewing automated treatment plans will result in improved patient safety.Keywords
This publication has 23 references indexed in Scilit:
- Fully Automatic Treatment Planning for External-Beam Radiation Therapy of Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer: A Tool for Low-Resource ClinicsJournal of Global Oncology, 2019
- Utilizing simulated errors in radiotherapy plans to quantify the effectiveness of the physics plan reviewMedical Physics, 2018
- Auto-delineation of oropharyngeal clinical target volumes using 3D convolutional neural networksPhysics in Medicine & Biology, 2018
- AAPM medical physics practice guideline 10.a.: Scope of practice for clinical medical physicsJournal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics, 2018
- Radiation Planning Assistant - A Streamlined, Fully Automated Radiotherapy Treatment Planning SystemJournal of Visualized Experiments, 2018
- Improving treatment plan evaluation with automationJournal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics, 2016
- Medical Physics Practice Guideline 4.a: Development, implementation, use and maintenance of safety checklistsJournal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics, 2015
- Quality Control Quantification (QCQ): A Tool to Measure the Value of Quality Control Checks in Radiation OncologyInternational Journal of Radiation Oncology - Biology - Physics (IJROBP), 2012
- Improved Planning Time and Plan Quality Through Multicriteria Optimization for Intensity-Modulated RadiotherapyInternational Journal of Radiation Oncology - Biology - Physics (IJROBP), 2012
- The use of human factors methods to identify and mitigate safety issues in radiation therapyRadiotherapy and Oncology, 2010