ESTRO 2022 - Abstract Book

S902

Abstract book

ESTRO 2022

1 Hospital Vall d'Hebron, Radiation Oncology, Barcelona, Spain; 2 Hospital Vall d'Hebron, Customer Service Coordination, Barcelona, Spain; 3 Hospital Vall d'Hebron, Medical Physics, Barcelona, Spain Purpose or Objective Halcyon is a linac with a specific design to be more comfortable for patients, however there are no comparisons between this equipment and the traditional linac assessing by the patients' perception. Our hypothesis is that Halcyon allows better optimization of treatment time and better patient assessment Materials and Methods Patients with early stage breast cancer or intermediate-risk prostate cancer were selected for study. After signing the informed consent form, simulation, volume delimitation and dose prescription were performed. The treatment schedule for breast cancer patients was 40.05 Gy on the breast and 48 Gy on the lumpectomy bed in 15 fractions (integrated boost IMRT) and for prostate cancer patients, 60 Gy in 20 fractions. An optimized dosimetric study was performed for the two accelerators and the dose-volume histograms were compared. The patient was eligible if the histograms did not show significant differences neither in the prescribed dose nor in the organs at risk according to the usual procedures. Half of the patients underwent the treatment in a Truebeam© and the other half in a Halcyon®. The distribution was randomized by unit and stratify by tumour site. In session number 8 (breast patients) and number 11 (prostate patients) the treatment unit was changed to the other linac. Treatment was performed daily with IGRT and online correction in both units. Two different questionnaires have been designed to determine the patients' experience with the treatment team, following the recommendations of the scale defined by Mastaglia(1). Questionnaire 1 assesses the treatment unit and is answered in the 5th session of each unit (session 5th for the first linac and 13th-breast- or 16th-prostate- for the second linac). Questionnaire 2 allows comparison between the linacs and is answered on the last day of treatment (Table 1).

(1) Barbara Mastaglia, Christine Toye and Linda J. Kristjanson. Ensuring content validity in instrument development: Challenges and innovative approaches, Contemporary Nurse, 14:3, 281-291, DOI: 10.5172/conu.14.3.281

(

Results Forty patients (20 breast and 20 prostate cancer) were included in the study. Two patients withdrew consent (1 patient in each group) so 38 patients completed all 3 surveys. As shown in Figure 1, in all questions the scores for Halcyon© were better than for TrueBeam©. The duration of treatment was perceived as shorter in Halcyon© (75% vs 25%). The Halcyon© was also perceived as quieter than the TrueBeam© (78.2% vs 11.2%). Finally, patients felt more comfortable at Halcyon©, both during treatment preparation (71.4% vs 28.6%) and during the treatment itself (61.9% vs 38.1%).