ESTRO 2022 - Abstract Book

S592

Abstract book

ESTRO 2022

A bespoke reflective training session on the concepts of competency and proficiency was designed and delivered by a senior RTT who was specialised in education and training. Staff who attended the training sessions were asked to complete a post training survey. The survey was structured on a virtual scenario of two fully competent junior RTT to deliver IGART side by side with remote senior RTT support as required; it was comprised of Likert and open-ended questions around the themes of safety, efficiency and job satisfaction for collecting opinions on working in a competency-driven RT department. A Mann Whitney test was used to determine if there were any significant differences in the scores of Likert questions between the junior and senior RTTs. Results 16 RTTs (7 junior and 9 senior) attended the training session and completed post training survey. As demonstrated in table 1, there were statistically significant differences in scoring under safety and efficiency themes between the junior and senior RTT groups (p<0.01). There was general unease from the senior RTTs on the issue allowing junior RTTs to work together, even if they were to hold sufficient IGART competency. Senior RTTs were more likely to perceive junior RTTs working together as being unsafe and leading to minimal gains in efficiency. In contrast junior RTTs felt that there were more positive aspects with a competency-driven RT department in terms of personal development. There was a lack of understanding of different levels of competency proficiency levels (being developed, basic, intermediate, advanced and expert) among the attendees.

Conclusion Findings indicated mixed perceptions on the possible benefits and concerns of allowing junior RTTs to work together in IGART treatment delivery, with senior RTTs more likely to view it as a negative change. Further investigation of the potential for reducing our reliance on role seniority is required in light of (i) increased competency and proficiency assessments and (ii) co-creation of working practices, with the aim to enhance patient care and departmental efficiency.

PD-0658 Understanding and improving awareness among Radiation Technologists for research: An Indian survey

P. Das 1 , S. Guria 1 , S.L. Debnath 1 , J. Singh 1 , C. Shekhar 1 , Y. Lamba 1 , M. . 1 , S. Hooda 1 , D.K. Saini 1 , S. Gopal 2 , S. Arora 1 , S. Dutt 2 , L. Nair 3 , A. Singh 2 , P. Patil 1 , A. Sharma 1 , S. Mallick 1 , D.N. Sharma 1 1 National Cancer Institute, AIIMS, Radiation Oncology, New Delhi, India; 2 IRCH, AIIMS, Radiation Oncology, New Delhi, India; 3 National Cancer Institute, AIIMS, R, New Delhi, India Purpose or Objective Radiation Oncology is an evidence-based branch and Radiation therapy technologists (RTT) constitute an important part of the team delivering the optimum treatment to the patients. It is, thus, essential for the RTTs to be a part of the research and deliver treatment which is updated to the current available evidences. In this survey, we assess the current knowledge among the RTTs across the country and measures needed to improve the awareness for involvement in research. Materials and Methods We conducted an online questionnaire-based survey which was mailed among the RTTs across India in the month of October 2021. The questionnaire consisted of two parts – a general section including 12 questions about the details of the workplace and available machines for treatment delivery and a specific section containing 15 questions assessing the awareness for the research and future directions. The frequencies obtained in the survey were assessed using descriptive statistical analyses. Results A total of 127 responses were assessed with the median age of 31 years (Range 19-59 years) and 71.1% being male respondents. Majority of the participants had completed Diploma (52%) and 53.3% were working in Government academic institute followed by 37.3% from Private institutes. Median working duration was 8 hours among the participants and majority of them were satisfied with the working hours. Not surprisingly, 52.1% respondents did not have any academic publications to their name and only one respondent had 10 publications. However, 44.7% agreed to having sufficient training in research and 55.3% strongly felt their workplace encouraged research work. Almost all of them felt the need for evidence- based practice and the need for the link with research. However, 64% felt they had medium-level knowledge in developing research projects but if given the opportunity, 88% would attend courses in improving the same. Surprisingly, the access to national and international journals was found to be very low with 78.1% respondents denying access.

Conclusion