4.1 Article

Brachytherapy training: A survey of French radiation oncology residents

Journal

CANCER RADIOTHERAPIE
Volume 18, Issue 1, Pages 28-34

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.canrad.2013.07.150

Keywords

Education; Brachytherapy; Residency; Program evaluation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose. - The goal of this study was to evaluate the interest of the members of the French society of young radiation oncologists (SFjRO) for brachytherapy as well as their theoretical and practical level in this radiation technique. Materials and methods. - An anonymous survey was conducted regarding practical and theoretical teaching of brachytherapy before the French national courses on brachytherapy. Results. - Among the 106 residents attending this teaching course, 99 (93%) answered the survey. Most of them were interested in brachytherapy but 82% considered they had not received sufficient teaching. Relevant indications of brachytherapy were known by 76% of the residents for gynaecological malignancies and 70% for prostate. Seventy-one percent of the residents have seen at least one gynecological brachytherapy but only 12% knew how to deal with this technique. Fifty-six percent have seen vaginal high dose rate brachytherapy and 21% had acquired the technique. For prostate brachytherapy, 65% had seen and done an implant and only 4% had acquired the technique. Fifty percent have performed at least one brachytherapy treatment during their residency. Residents expressed a strong wish for more courses about dosimetry (82%), technique (75%) and treatment planning (90%). Conclusion. - Our, study shows the interest of French residents for brachytherapy but suggests that practical teaching courses and an evaluation of the existing theoretical courses are warranted. (C) 2013 Societe francaise de radiotherapie oncologique (SFRO). Published by Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available