Lawrence B. Marks

245 Background: Workload is a hypothetical construct representing the overall human cost incurred during a task. Across disciplines, the NASA Task Load Index (TLX) has been used as a subjective measure of workload. It quantifies six dimensions of work (mental, physical, and temporal demands, frustration, effort, and performance) on a scale of 1-100 scale, with scores >55 (i.e. overworked) associated with lesser performance. We herein quantify differences in physician workload for planning a relatively “simple” (palliative 2 field opposed lateral brain) versus relatively “complex” (curative 4 field pancreas) case. Further, we explore the association between workload and performance to define TLX levels where performance could be expected to decline. Methods: Nine physicians planned two cases, each case involving three tasks (i.e., task 1 - review written patient medical records; task 2 - review diagnostic images and design of treatment fields; and task 3 - review and approval of the treatment plan). After completing each case, TLX scores of each case/task was collected. Differences in workload between cases/tasks were assessed via ANOVA. The association between workload and performance (assessed using time-to-task completion and self-assessments) was assessed via Pearson’s correlation test. Results: 54 TLX workload and performance assessments were obtained. Workloads for the simple brain case/tasks averaged 41-48, versus 62-69 for the complex pancreas case/tasks (p0.1). There was a correlation between TLX scores and time-to-complete (r=0.54, p 55, which is consistent with findings from other industries. Thus, we propose workload assessment (via TLX) to be considered as an independent quality measure to assess the quality assurance (QA) of processes used to deliver radiation therapy.

To estimate the"age" of cancers at the time of diagnosis, we reviewed data on the "time to local/regional recurrence" (LRF) following initial surgical resection for three common cancers, then applied a modified version of Collins' law. We conducted a systematic review of English medical literature to identify studies reporting LRF rates, over time, following surgery alone for breast, lung, or colorectal cancer. Patients who received radiation/hormones/chemotherapy were excluded since these therapies may alter tumor growth kinetics after surgery. For each disease, data were considered in three ways: 1) absolute cumulative LRF rate over time; 2) percentage of LRFs manifest over time (to facilitate comparisons between studies with different absolute magnitudes of LRFs); and 3) weighted average of the percentage of LRFs manifest over time. For breast cancer (based on data from 3043 patients from 5 studies), we found that the median time to LRF was 2.7 years. For lung cancer (based on data from 1190 patients from 4 studies), the median time to LRF was 1.5 years. For rectal cancer (based on data from 3334 patients from 10 studies), the median time to LRF was 1.5 years. Based on Collins' law, the distribution of time to LRF suggests that the age of most of the solid tumors studied was 3 to 6 years.

Radical prostatectomy and ultrasound-guided transperineal brachytherapy are both commonly used for the treatment of localized prostate cancer. No randomized trials are available to compare these modalities. Therefore, the physician must rely on institutional reports of results to determine which therapy is most effective. While some investigators have concluded that both therapies are effective, others have concluded that radical prostatectomy should remain the gold standard for the treatment of this disease. This article reviews the major series available for both treatments and discusses the major controversies involved in making these comparisons. The data indicate that for low-risk disease, both treatments are effective, controlling disease in over 80% of the cases, with no evidence to support the use of one treatment over the other. Similarly, for intermediate-risk disease, the conclusion that one treatment is superior to the other cannot be drawn. Brachytherapy should be performed in conjunction with external-beam radiation therapy in this group of patients. For patients with high-risk disease, neither treatment consistently achieves biochemical control rates above 50%. Although radical prostatectomy and/or brachytherapy may play a role in the care of high-risk patients in the future, external-beam radiation therapy in combination with androgen deprivation has the best track record to date.