Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Introductory Radiation Oncology Curriculum: Report of a National Needs Assessment and Multi-institutional Pilot Implementation

  • Jillian R. Gunther
  • , Rachel B. Jimenez
  • , Raphael L. Yechieli
  • , Akash Parekh
  • , Abigail T. Berman
  • , Steve E. Braunstein
  • , Ariel E. Hirsch
  • , Erin F. Gillespie
  • , Neha Vapiwala
  • , Charles R. Thomas
  • , Emma C. Fields
  • , Daniel W. Golden
  • University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
  • Massachusetts General Hospital
  • University of Miami
  • University of Florida
  • University of Pennsylvania
  • University of California at San Francisco
  • Boston University
  • Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center
  • Oregon Health and Science University
  • Virginia Commonwealth University
  • University of Chicago

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

14 Scopus citations

Abstract

Purpose: To assess the optimal structure of an introductory curriculum (IC) for radiation oncology residents, including the perceived utility of a 2-day off-site “boot camp,” and evaluate the success of a pilot introductory radiation oncology curriculum (IROC) based on these initial data. Methods and Materials: In the first phase, anonymous, web-based surveys were sent to US radiation oncology program directors and residents. Likert-type scores (1, not at all; 5, extremely) are reported as the median and interquartile range. Using the phase 1 results, IROC was developed, piloted, and evaluated. Results: Of the 89 program directors and 697 residents, 47 (53%) and 165 (24%) responded, respectively. Of the 89 program directors, 37 (79%) reported offering a formal IC. However, only 83 residents (50%) reported having a formal IC. Program directors reported resident preparation for clinical training as “moderate” (median 3, interquartile range 2-3) on entering residency and “moderate” (median 3, interquartile range 3-4) after IC completion (P = .03). However, residents only believed they were “slightly” prepared (median 2, interquartile range 1-2) on entering residency and “moderately” (median 3, interquartile range 2-3) prepared after IC completion (P < .01). Program directors believed an off-site boot camp would be of “moderate” utility (median 3, interquartile range 3-4) with participation limited by funding (57%). Residents without an IC reported that having an IC would be “quite” beneficial (median 4, interquartile range 3-5). Residents preferred instruction before the clinical training (49%) and over 1 week (40%). Both program directors and residents rated lectures on radiation emergencies and simulation highly. Using these data, IROC was developed and piloted with incoming residents at 4 institutions. After IROC, residents reported improvement in overall preparedness for clinical training (before: median 1, interquartile range 1-2; vs after: median 3, interquartile range 2-3; P < .01) and among specific practice domains. Conclusions: Beginning radiation oncology residents frequently lack structured introductory curricula but desire instruction before the clinical training with a focus on practical aspects (emergency management, contouring). Program directors recognize the value of both off-site and on-site boot camps. An on-site IC could mitigate funding barriers. A standardized IC, IROC, piloted at 4 programs, showed promising outcomes.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1029-1038
Number of pages10
JournalInternational Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics
Volume101
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 1 2018

Keywords

  • Clinical Competence
  • Curriculum
  • Education, Medical, Graduate
  • Humans
  • Internet
  • Internship and Residency
  • Needs Assessment
  • Pilot Projects
  • Program Evaluation
  • Radiation Oncology/education
  • Surveys and Questionnaires
  • United States

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Introductory Radiation Oncology Curriculum: Report of a National Needs Assessment and Multi-institutional Pilot Implementation'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this