Dedicated Diagnostic Radiology/Radiation Oncology Rounds: Added Value Beyond Traditional Tumor Boards

We aimed to evaluate the impact of collaborative discussion between diagnostic radiologists and radiation oncologists on radiation oncology management for thoracic oncology patients. We reviewed cases presented at multidisciplinary thoracic tumor boards (TTB) (n = 122) and diagnostic radiology/radia...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Current problems in diagnostic radiology 2020-07, Vol.49 (4), p.248-253
Main Authors: Kallianos, Kimberly G., Muhoozi, Bannet N., Gottschalk, Alexander, Yom, Sue S., Chan, Jason W., Henry, Travis S., Elicker, Brett M., Ordovas, Karen G., Naeger, David M.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Aged
Female
Humans
Interdisciplinary Communication
Male
Patient Care Planning
Prospective Studies
Radiation Oncology
Radiology
Surveys and Questionnaires
Thoracic Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging
Thoracic Neoplasms - radiotherapy
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:We aimed to evaluate the impact of collaborative discussion between diagnostic radiologists and radiation oncologists on radiation oncology management for thoracic oncology patients. We reviewed cases presented at multidisciplinary thoracic tumor boards (TTB) (n = 122) and diagnostic radiology/radiation oncology rounds (DR/ROR) (n = 45). Changes in planned radiation management following imaging discussion were categorized—no change, timing change, and treatment volume change. Phase of care was also classified. In DR/ROR, radiation oncologists were surveyed regarding (1) change in radiation oncology management and (2) change in confidence (both 5-point Likert scales). Discussion of imaging with a radiologist changed radiation oncology management in 31.1% of TTB cases and 68.9% of DR/ROR cases (P < 0.001). Changes to the timing of initiating radiation therapy occurred with similar frequency in the 2 settings (31.1% vs 46.7%, P = 0.063). Changes to target volume occurred more frequently in DR/ROR (35.6% vs
ISSN:0363-0188
1535-6302
DOI:10.1067/j.cpradiol.2019.05.004