Oversight protocols in the management of network of facility sites

被引:0
|
作者
Saw, C. [1 ]
Combine, T. [1 ]
Ottino, F. [1 ]
Quader, M. [1 ]
Tao, L. [1 ]
Bose, S. [1 ]
Chen, H. [1 ]
Huq, M. [1 ]
Heron, D. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Pittsburgh, Inst Canc, Pittsburgh, PA USA
关键词
D O I
10.1118/1.2760645
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Purpose: The management of quality for a network of facility sites poses challenges for an institution. Holding regular meetings, auditing treatment facilities, and requests for documentation are some mechanisms for providing clinical and quality oversights. This presentation discusses our institution protocols in recent auditing of second dosimetric checks and request for RPC‐TLD report for analysis. Methods and Materials: Our institution consists of an integrated network of 20 community (“spoke”) and academic facilities and spread about 150 miles radius from our downtown proper (“hub”). An average of 650 external beam patients are treated daily. With the diversity amongst the facilities, a common set of standards are essential to establishing quality across the facilities. This presentation examined two protocols for this Purpose: auditing second dosimetric checks and request for RPC‐TLD reports. The established protocol recommended second dosimetric checks be performed prior to the third fraction following the start of each new treatment field or field modification consistent with AAPM TG‐40 recommendation. Ten patient treatment records were randomly selected for evaluation by six auditors quarterly. The second protocol requires all RPC‐TLD reports be forwarded to the Office of Medical Physics for analysis and reporting annually. Results: Although the non‐compliance for second dosimetric checks of patient treatment records was low, there was a trend towards non‐compliance at selective facilities. RPC‐TLD analysis showed a bell‐shape curve with the median at 0.98 for the ratio of RPC measurement to institutional stated dose values. Facilities whose dose values are outside ±5% have to repeat measurements. Conclusion: Quality oversight protocols are essential to set standards of performance for institutions having a network of facilities. Establishing oversight protocols will pose challenges for any institution and two examples are given in this presentation, where data are collected by different means. © 2007, American Association of Physicists in Medicine. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:2400 / 2400
页数:1
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] An evaluation of network management protocols
    Goncalves, Pedro
    Oliveira, Jose Luis
    Aguiar, Rui L.
    2009 IFIP/IEEE INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON INTEGRATED NETWORK MANAGEMENT (IM 2009) VOLS 1 AND 2, 2009, : 537 - +
  • [2] Network Friendliness of Mobility Management Protocols
    Rahman, Md Sazzadur
    Atiquzzaman, Mohammed
    GLOBECOM 2009 - 2009 IEEE GLOBAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS CONFERENCE, VOLS 1-8, 2009, : 1175 - 1180
  • [3] Analysis of Network Management Protocols in Wireless Sensor Network
    Zhang, Bin
    Li, Guohui
    2008 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MULTIMEDIA AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, PROCEEDINGS, 2008, : 546 - 549
  • [4] Survey of Network Management Protocols in Wireless Sensor Network
    Zhang, Bin
    Li, Guohui
    2009 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON E-BUSINESS AND INFORMATION SYSTEM SECURITY, VOLS 1 AND 2, 2009, : 850 - 854
  • [5] Twenty Years of Advancements in a Radiotherapy Facility: Clinical Protocols, Technology, and Management
    Tomatis, Stefano
    Mancosu, Pietro
    Reggiori, Giacomo
    Lobefalo, Francesca
    Gallo, Pasqualina
    Lambri, Nicola
    Paganini, Lucia
    La Fauci, Francesco
    Bresolin, Andrea
    Parabicoli, Sara
    Pelizzoli, Marco
    Navarria, Pierina
    Franzese, Ciro
    Lenoci, Domenico
    Scorsetti, Marta
    CURRENT ONCOLOGY, 2023, 30 (07) : 7031 - 7042
  • [6] Cooperative protocols for HF frequency and network management
    Sudworth, JP
    SEVENTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON HF RADIO SYSTEMS AND TECHNIQUES, 1997, (441): : 270 - 274
  • [7] A study of encoding overhead in network management protocols
    Goncalves, Pedro
    Oliveira, Jose Luis
    Aguiar, Rui
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF NETWORK MANAGEMENT, 2012, 22 (06) : 435 - 450
  • [8] A comparative analysis of protocols for IoT network management
    Mota, Levi Costa
    Moreno, Edward David
    Ribeiro, Admilson Lima
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE EURO AMERICAN CONFERENCE ON TELEMATICS AND INFORMATION SYSTEMS (EATIS '18), 2018,
  • [9] NETWORK MANAGEMENT ARCHITECTURES AND PROTOCOLS - PROBLEMS AND APPROACHES
    CASSEL, LN
    PARTRIDGE, C
    WESTCOTT, J
    IEEE JOURNAL ON SELECTED AREAS IN COMMUNICATIONS, 1989, 7 (07) : 1104 - 1114
  • [10] Trust management and network layer security protocols
    Blaze, M
    Anderson, R
    Roe, M
    Lee, S
    Gligor, V
    Christianson, B
    SECURITY PROTOCOLS, 2000, 1796 : 109 - 118