Abstract Book

S289

ESTRO 37

SP-0542 Radiation Therapist: what’s in the word? A. Vaandering 1 1 UCL Cliniques Univ. St.Luc, Academic Department of Radiation Oncology, Brussels, Belgium Abstract text All over the world, various professional titles are used to encompass the professional group that has, amongst other tasks, the direct responsibility of administrating radiotherapy to patients. A general ESTRO consensus was obtained in 2004 in which it was decided that the title “Radiation TherapisT” (RTT) should ideally be used for this professional group. This title is ideal as it highlights the dual role of RTTs in which they have to combine the action of handling highly technological modalities with patient care. Although the standard scope of practice of RTTs varies across countries, the underlying principle of having to deal with this dual role remains consistent. This principle is even more accentuated with the advent of increased treatment complexity and an ageing population. However, over the years, additional roles have become intertwined into the initial “dual role” of RTTs. The ever- increasing demands for greater efficiency and optimized quality of care have resulted in a demanding work environment for the RTTs but also for the entire Multidisciplinary team (MDT). As a result, RTTs are becoming involved in a wider range of clinical tasks and responsibilities leading to redefined professional boundaries that define the scope of practice of RTTs. Furthermore, the recognition of RTTs as being the 3rd pillar of optimal patient care in radiotherapy has also lead to the involvement of RTTs in fields such as research and development. These evolving roles and resulting changes in the RTT’s scope of practice can be quite beneficial for a radiotherapy department. But these changes must evidently be accompanied with adapted educational programs without which safety of practice can no longer be assured. Lastly, RTTs, mainly due to their position in the radiotherapy process, their contact with complex modalities and their daily interactions with patients, have always and still have an important role in optimising quality of care and preventing and detecting potential treatment errors. RTT are thus excellent candidates and dynamic actors in the implementation of a quality and safety culture within a radiotherapy department. And in an era of value-based cancer care, the implementation of integrative quality management systems within radiotherapy departments will become a necessity and the role of RTTs within this framework is unquestionable. SP-0543 Innovative education to cover the gaps J.G. Eriksen 1 1 Aarhus University Hospital, Dept. of Experimental Clinical Oncology, Aarhus, Denmark Abstract text Radiation therapy is one of the most cost-effective ways to treat cancer - both in a curative and a palliative setting. Despite this, the gap in radiation oncology capacity is still noticeable especially in low- and middle- income countries where a rapid rise in the incidence of cancer cases is a serious problem. The urgent need for radiotherapy resources in terms of bunkers and megavoltage machines is important, but equally important is the lack of properly educated health care professionals. This includes not just medical doctors, but also medical physicists, radiation therapists and nurses, as well as other supporting health care personnel. A possible way to cover these knowledge gaps are to evolve how we deliver the education and the presentation will discuss current initiatives.

First of all, it is important to recognise that although differences exists around the world, the minimum competences of a radiation oncologist, a medical physicist or an RTT should basically be the same and therefore there is a need to define a common frame: an international minimum standard through globally accepted curricula. Secondly, there is a need to critically evaluate how we deliver education today. Most often, postgraduate education are performed as live events in courses or at conferences, but that is not necessarily cost-effective. Therefore, there is a need to explore other ways of gaining knowledge without compromising on the quality of the teaching. This is not a trivial task and initiatives are multiple. One typical example is pure one-way online teaching. Although having the benefit of an asynchronous format one-way online learning rarely meet the needs for interactivity, reflection and application to practice. For that, more blended approaches of online and live teaching seems to be more attractive for obtaining not just knowledge but also skills. Examples of such activities will be presented as well as the long-term retention rate will be discussed. Finally, closing educational gaps effectively also requires tailored initiatives focused for the end-users, teaching empowerment including “train the trainers”-programs, exchange programs and long-term strategies involving a multiple of stakeholders. Some of these initiatives will be highlighted in the presentation. SP-0544 Dual energy CT: Benefits for proton therapy planning and beyond C. Richter 1 , P. Wohlfahrt 1,2 , C. Möhler 3,4 , S. Greilich 3,4 1 OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, High Precision Radiotherapy Group, Dresden, Germany 2 Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology - OncoRay, Dresden, Germany 3 German Cancer Research Center DKFZ, Division of Medical Physics in Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg, Germany 4 Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology HIRO, Division of Medical Physics in Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg, Germany For about a decade, dual-energy CT (DECT) has been clinically available, mainly for radiology applications. In contrast, in the field of radiotherapy DECT has gained relevant interest over the last few years and here clinical use is still far away from being clinical standard. In this lecture benefits of DECT for radiotherapy applications will be discussed. The focus will be on application for treatment planning in proton therapy, namely the individual prediction of tissue’s stopping power relative to water (SPR) as an alternative to the standard approach using a generic look-up table (HLUT). The manifold information gathered by two CT scans with different X-ray spectra allow for a patient-specific and direct calculation of relative electron density and SPR [1,2]. This enables the consideration of intra- and inter-patient variabilities in CT-based SPR prediction and ultimately a more accurate range prediction. The talk will cover the validation of the SPR prediction accuracy in realistic ground-truth scenarios [3,4], the investigation of clinical relevant differences between the DECT-based and the standard HLUT-based SPR prediction in clinical patient data [5] as Abstract text Synopsis Joint Symposium: ESTRO-ESR: New imaging approaches for radiotherapy