Performance of different radiotherapy workload models1 Export

@article{citeulike:3477913, abstract = {Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of different radiotherapy workload models using a prospectively collected dataset of patient and treatment information from a single center. Methods and Materials: Information about all individual radiotherapy treatments was collected for 2 weeks from the three linear accelerators (linacs) in our department. This information included diagnosis code, treatment site, treatment unit, treatment time, fields per fraction, technique, beam type, blocks, wedges, junctions, port films, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status. We evaluated the accuracy and precision of the original and revised basic treatment equivalent (BTE) model, the simple and complex Addenbrooke models, the equivalent simple treatment visit (ESTV) model, fields per hour, and two local standards of workload measurement. Results: Data were collected for 2 weeks in June 2001. During this time, 151 patients were treated with 857 fractions. The revised BTE model performed better than the other models with a mean |observed \&\#x2013;predicted| of 2.62 (2.44\&\#x2013;2.80). It estimated 88.0\% of treatment times within 5 min, which is similar to the previously reported accuracy of the model. Conclusion: The revised BTE model had similar accuracy and precision for data collected in our center as it did for the original dataset and performed the best of the models assessed. This model would have uses for patient scheduling, and describing workloads and case complexity.}, author = {Barbera, L. and Jackson, L. and Schulze, K. and Groome, P. and Foroudi, F. and Delaney, G. and Mackillop, W.}, citeulike-article-id = {3477913}, citeulike-linkout-0 = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0360-3016(02)04400-0}, citeulike-linkout-1 = {http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0360301602044000}, day = {15}, doi = {10.1016/S0360-3016(02)04400-0}, issn = {03603016}, journal = {International Journal of Radiation OncologyBiologyPhysics}, keywords = {model, phd, workload}, month = {March}, number = {4}, pages = {1143--1149}, posted-at = {2008-11-04 08:44:50}, priority = {2}, title = {Performance of different radiotherapy workload models1}, url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0360-3016(02)04400-0}, volume = {55}, year = {2003} }

TY - JOUR ID - citeulike:3477913 L3 - citeulike-article-id:3477913 N2 - Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of different radiotherapy workload models using a prospectively collected dataset of patient and treatment information from a single center. Methods and Materials: Information about all individual radiotherapy treatments was collected for 2 weeks from the three linear accelerators (linacs) in our department. This information included diagnosis code, treatment site, treatment unit, treatment time, fields per fraction, technique, beam type, blocks, wedges, junctions, port films, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status. We evaluated the accuracy and precision of the original and revised basic treatment equivalent (BTE) model, the simple and complex Addenbrooke models, the equivalent simple treatment visit (ESTV) model, fields per hour, and two local standards of workload measurement. Results: Data were collected for 2 weeks in June 2001. During this time, 151 patients were treated with 857 fractions. The revised BTE model performed better than the other models with a mean |observed –predicted| of 2.62 (2.44–2.80). It estimated 88.0% of treatment times within 5 min, which is similar to the previously reported accuracy of the model. Conclusion: The revised BTE model had similar accuracy and precision for data collected in our center as it did for the original dataset and performed the best of the models assessed. This model would have uses for patient scheduling, and describing workloads and case complexity. IS - 4 JF - International Journal of Radiation OncologyBiologyPhysics SN - 03603016 EP - 1149 TI - Performance of different radiotherapy workload models1 VL - 55 SP - 1143 KW - model KW - phd KW - workload AU - Barbera, L AU - Jackson, L AU - Schulze, K AU - Groome, P AU - Foroudi, F AU - Delaney, G AU - Mackillop, W PY - 2003/03/15/ UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0360-3016(02)04400-0 ER -