Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T07:59:24.307Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Managing workflow in treatment planning using standard spreadsheet software

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 December 2008

J. Vaarkamp ,
C.S. Hamilton ,
M. Escreet  and
C. Percy
J. Vaarkamp*
Affiliation:
Radiation Physics Department, Princess Royal Hospital, Hull and East Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust, Hull, UK
C.S. Hamilton
Affiliation:
Radiotherapy Department, Princess Royal Hospital, Hull and East Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust, Hull, UK
M. Escreet
Affiliation:
Radiation Physics Department, Princess Royal Hospital, Hull and East Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust, Hull, UK
C. Percy
Affiliation:
Radiation Physics Department, Princess Royal Hospital, Hull and East Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust, Hull, UK
*
Correspondence to: J. Vaarkamp, Radiation Physics Department, Princess Royal Hospital, Saltshouse Road, Hull, East Yorkshire, HU8 9HE, UK. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Aims: Recent years have seen an expansion of UK radiotherapy treatment capacity with a drive to reduce radiotherapy waiting times. Consequently, the time available for planning patients is decreasing. In this context, management of treatment planning workflow in the Princess Royal Hospital is described and monthly planning times are presented from September 2003 onwards.

Materials and Methods: After patients are imaged, patient name, unit number and appointments are available to the planning spreadsheet via a link to the radiotherapy information system. The planning spreadsheet is in descending order of appointment date. Treatment planning staff select the first available task, taking account of individual competencies. At plan completion, the patient record is moved to the completed list.

Results: Since September 2003, patient numbers through treatment planning steadily increased from around 90 a month to about 130 currently. Planning times decreased from 11 to 7 workdays.

Conclusions: Workflow through treatment planning is indirectly managed and the approach allows for day-to-day staffing fluctuations and competency levels. There is instant information on planning status for all patients throughout the department, building up a record as part of the work process. Bottlenecks and staff training needs can be analysed by reviewing the historic patient workload.

Keywords

Treatment planning workflowpatient schedulingpatient wait times
Type
Original Article
Information
Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice , Volume 7 , Issue 4 , December 2008 , pp. 213 - 221
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

National Audit Office. The NHS cancer plan: a progress report. Stationary Office, 2005.Google Scholar
Department of Health. NHS cancer plan. Department of Health, 2000.Google Scholar
Board of the Faculty of Clinical Oncology. Equipment, workload and staffing for radiotherapy in the UK 1997–2002. Royal College of Radiologists, 2003.Google Scholar
Cancer Services Collaborative. www.cancerimprovement.nhs.uk.Google Scholar
NHS Modernisation Agency. Clinically Prioritise and Treat (CpaT): towards a fully booked NHS. NHS Modernisation Agency, 2003.Google Scholar
Williams, MV, Summers, ET, Drinkwater, K, Barrett, A.Radiotherapy dose fractionation, access and waiting times in the countries of the UK in 2005. Clin Oncol 2007; 19: 273–286.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bridge, P, Jenkinson, D.Achieving waiting time targets: at what cost? J Radiother Pract 2003; 3: 147–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, JM, Ryan, G, Duchesne, G.Clinical prioritisation for curative radiotherapy: a local waiting list initiative. Clin Oncol 2004; 16: 299–306.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Routsis, D, Thomas, S, Head, J.Are extended working days sustainable in radiotherapy? J Radiother Pract 2006; 5: 77–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, L, Beckingham, E, Calman, F, Deehan, C.Extended hours working in radiotherapy in the UK. Clin Oncol 2007; 19: 213–222.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Delaney, GP, Gebski, V, Lunn, AD et al. Basic treatment equivalent (BTE): a new measure of linear accelerator workload. Clin Oncol 1997; 9: 234–239.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Probst, H, Griffiths, S.Retaining therapy radiographers: What's so special about us? J Radiother Pract 2007; 6: 21–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolderstron, A.Advanced practice perspectives in radiation therapy. J Radiother Pract 2004; 4: 57–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Department of Health Learning and Personal Development Division. Radiography skills mix: a report on the four-tier service delivery model. Department of Health, 2003.Google Scholar
Slack, N, Chambers, S, Harland, C, Harrison, A, Johnston, R. Operations Management. 2nd Edition. London:FT Pitman publishing, 1998.Google Scholar
Liker, JK. The Toyota Way. New York, NY: McGraw Hill, 2004.Google Scholar
Cox, J, Goldratt, EM. The goal: a process of ongoing improvement. Great Barrington, MA: North River Press, 1986.Google Scholar
NHS Institute for Innovation and Improvement. Lean Six Sigma: some basic concepts. NHS Institute for Innovation and Improvement, 2005.Google Scholar
Head, J, Routsis, D.Radiotherapy plc – The Addenbrooke's experience. J Radiother Pract 2006; 5: 63–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maastro Clinic. Capaciteitsuitbreiding radiotherapie door patientgerichte aanpak. Maastro, 2003.Google Scholar
Erridge, SC, Porter, HQ, Rugg, LJ et al. Reducing waiting times: a whole department approach. Clin Oncol 2007; 19: S9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmberg, O, McClean, B.A method of predicting workload and staffing level for radiotherapy treatment planning as plan complexity changes. Clin Oncol 2003; 15: 359–363.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thomas, SJ.Capacity and demand models for radiotherapy treatment machines. Clin Oncol 2003; 15: 353–358.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vaarkamp, J, Holmes, ME, Melling, D, Lewis, S, Jeffery, K, Whitton, V. The effect on wait of prioritising patients for radiotherapy treatment in the Hull Princess Royal Hospital oncology department. IPEM Annual Scientific Meeting York, 2004.Google Scholar
NHS Modernisation Agency. 10 High Impact Changes, Change No 8, Improve patient access by reducing the number of queues. NHS Modernisation Agency, 2004.Google Scholar