Abstract
Data have demonstrated that hypofractionated radiation therapy (HFRT) and conventionally fractionated radiation therapy regimens are equivalent with respect to outcomes. Efforts to increase HFRT use have had mixed success. We implemented a prospective peer review chart rounds integrating all practice sites and reviewed the use of HFRT in an attempt to identify potential predictors of use. Patients treated with whole-breast radiation therapy within our cancer care network from January 2016 to June 2017 were evaluated. Radiation courses with a dose per fraction of greater than 2 Gy were considered HFRT, whereas those with a dose per fraction of less than or equal to 2 Gy were considered as conventionally fractionated radiation therapy. Patient, provider, and tumor characteristics were categorized by use of HFRT and compared between groups using a χ2 test or two-tailed t test. A total of 349 consecutive patients were identified. All 120 patients treated at the main academic site received HFRT. There was significant variation in use of HFRT among community-based providers (28% to 100%; P < .001). There was increased use of HFRT after implementation of institution-wide prospective peer review (66% v 81% before and after implementation, respectively; P = .001). Age, tumor grade, chemotherapy receipt, surgeon type (academic v community), and treatment after implementation of peer review all correlated with HFRT use. On multivariable analysis, treatment after implementation of peer review ( P < .001) remained a significant predictor of HFRT use, as did age ( P = .005), tumor grade ( P = .013), and surgeon type ( P < .001). Significant variation persists in the use of HFRT among providers. Increased awareness and oversight through prospective peer review may be useful in improving compliance to HFRT. Expanding these efforts to include education of referring surgeons may be helpful.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have