ESTRO 2024 - Abstract Book

S4941

Physics - Quality assurance and auditing

ESTRO 2024

Over a three-month period, the frequency and types of errors leading to necessary plan adjustments. Each plan underwent a minimum of two PlanCheck reviews: one by the medical physicist who created the plan and another by a radiation oncologist during acceptance. If any adjustments were required, the plan would undergo additional approval and checking cycles, thus increasing the number of script uses.

Fig.1: Display of the PlanCheck graphical user interface, illustrating a sample case evaluation. The interface comprises four distinct sections: Plan Selection, Dose Metric Evaluation, Plan Checks, and Dose Volume Histogram Visualization. Embedded additional functionalities include options for generating plan reports and comparing different plans.

Results:

The script was utilized 1,282 times to review 342 plans involving 281 patients. On average, PlanCheck was accessed 3.7 times per plan (range 2-12, SD 1.6). A total of 69 errors that required plan adjustments were uncovered. Each identified error was assigned a severity level on a scale from 1 to 5. These findings are presented in Tab.1.

Severity Level

Error Category

Specific Issue

Occurrences

Isocenter

Problematic Placement

2

1

Pacemaker/ICD

Missing Structure

2

1

Beam ID

Incorrect

8

1

Beam Tolerance

Missing or Incorrect Table

4

1

Reference & Target ID

Mismatch

7

1

Reference Point

Missing Location

2

1

Course Name

Incorrect

2

1