Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T03:08:53.620Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluating the effectiveness of the clinical research radiographer undertaking the on-treatment review of clinical trial patients receiving radiotherapy for prostate cancer

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 December 2018

Stacey Murray ,
Terri M Gilleece Open the ORCID record for Terri M Gilleece [Opens in a new window]  and
Paul H Shepherd
Stacey Murray
Affiliation:
School of Health Sciences, Ulster University, Newtownabbey, Antrim, UK
Terri M Gilleece*
Affiliation:
School of Health Sciences, Ulster University, Newtownabbey, Antrim, UK
Paul H Shepherd
Affiliation:
School of Health Sciences, Ulster University, Newtownabbey, Antrim, UK
*
Author for correspondence: Terri M Gilleece, School of Health Sciences, Ulster University, Shore Road, Newtownabbey, BT37 0QB, Antrim, UK. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background

Radiotherapy clinical trials are at the forefront of modern-day prostate cancer patient management. Patients are reviewed during treatment by clinical oncologists or competent on-treatment review radiographers to minimise treatment toxicities. Clinical Research Radiographers (CRRs) routinely monitor and gather research data from patients participating in clinical trials.

Purpose

The aim of this article is to evaluate the effectiveness of the CRR undertaking the on-treatment review of clinical trial patients.

Method

An experienced CRR within the Northern Ireland Cancer Trials Network was supervised by a clinical oncologist to undertake the role of the on-treatment review of patients receiving radiotherapy for prostate cancer. The CRR explored published literature and compiled this written evaluation as part of their advanced practice learning.

Results

The supervising clinical oncologist verified, following the planned period of supervised practice and academic study, that the CRR was competent to fulfil the role. Evidence of the beneficial synergistic impact of co-joining the roles was experienced at first hand during the undertaking of supervised practice.

Conclusion

Co-joining the roles and responsibilities of the CRR and the on-treatment review radiographer enhanced the quality of care offered to the patients participating in clinical trials.

Keywords

Clinical Research Radiographer (CRR)clinical trialsprostate cancerradiotherapyradiographer review
Type
Original Article
Information
Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice , Volume 18 , Issue 2 , June 2019 , pp. 123 - 126
Check for updates
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2018 

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.)

Footnotes

Cite this article: Murray S, Gilleece TM, Shepherd PH. (2019) Evaluating the effectiveness of the clinical research radiographer undertaking the on-treatment review of clinical trial patients receiving radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice18: 123–126. doi: 10.1017/S1460396918000626

References

1. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Prostate cancer: Diagnosis and Management. NICE clinical guideline CG175 developed by the National Collaborating Centre for Cancer. 2014. https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg175. Accessed 7th October 2018.Google Scholar
2. Anandadas, C N, Clark, N W, Davidson, S E et al. Early prostate cancer—which treatment do men prefer and why? BJU Int 2011; 107 (11): 1762–1768.Google Scholar
3. Bauman, G, Rumble, R B, Chen, J, Loblaw, A, Warde, P. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy in the treatment of prostate cancer. Clin Oncol 2012; 24 (7): 461–473.Google Scholar
4. Cancer Research UK. https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancer-statistics/statistics-by-cancer-type/prostate-cancer. Accessed 7th October 2018.Google Scholar
5. Ferlay, J, Soerjomataram, I, Dikshit, R et al. Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012. Int J Cancer 2015; 136 (5): E359–E386.Google Scholar
6. ACORRN Research Radiographer Working Party, Russell, W, McNair, HA et al. Gap analysis of role definition and training needs for Therapeutic Research Radiographers in the UK. Br J Radiol 2007; 80: 693–701.Google Scholar
7. The Department of Health. The National Health Service Plan, a plan for investment, a plan for reform. 2000. https://navigator.health.org.uk/content/nhs-plan-plan-investment-plan-reform-2000. Accessed 7th October 2018.Google Scholar
8. The Department of Health, The NHS Cancer Plan and the new NHS: providing a patient centred service. 2004. http://www.wales.nhs.uk/technologymls/cymraeg/resources/pdf/cancer_nsf.pdf. Accessed 7th October 2018.Google Scholar
9. Cancer Research UK and NHS England. Vision for Radiotherapy 2014–2024. March 2014. https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/sites/default/files/policy_feb2014_radiotherapy_vision2014-2024_final.pdf. Accessed 7th October 2018.Google Scholar
10. Lee, L. The role of the “on treatment” review radiographer: what are the requirements? J Radiother Pract 2008; 7: 113–131.Google Scholar
11. Colyer, H. The role of the radiotherapy treatment review radiographer. Radiography 2000; 6: 253–260.Google Scholar
12. Ellis, T, Ashmore, L, Bray, D. Multidisciplinary radiographer-led review clinics—an example of implementation. J Radiother Pract 2006; 5: 87–95.Google Scholar
13. Morote, J, Maldonado, X, Morales-Bárrera, R. Prostate cancer. Clinical Medicine 2016; 146 (3): 121–127.Google Scholar
14. Kalbasi, A, Li, J, Berman, A T et al. Dose-escalated irradiation and overall survival in men with nonmetastatic prostate cancer. JAMA Oncol. 2015; 1: 897–906.Google Scholar
15. Kim, MM, Hoffman, KE, Levy, LB et al. Improvement in prostate cancer survival over time: a 20-year analysis. Cancer J 2012; 18 (1): 1–8.Google Scholar
16. Coyne, K, Zhou, Z, Thompson, C, Versi, E. The impact on health-related quality of life of stress, urge and mixed urinary incontinence. BJU Int 2003; 92 (7): 731–735.Google Scholar
17. Schaake, W, Wiegman, M E, de Groot, M et al. The impact of gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity on health related quality of life among irradiated prostate cancer patients. Radiother Oncol 2014; 110: 284–290.Google Scholar
18. Widmark, A, Klepp, O, Solberg, A et al. Endocrine treatment, with or without radiotherapy, in locally advanced prostate cancer (SPCG-7/SFUO-3): an open randomised phase III trial. Lancet 2009; 373: 301–308.Google Scholar
19. Kumar, R J, Barqawi, A, Crawford, E D. Adverse events associated with hormonal therapy for prostate cancer. Rev Urol 2005; 7 (Suppl 5): S47–S443.Google Scholar
20. Boberg, EW, Gustafson, D H, Hawkins, R P et al. Assessing the unmet information, support and care delivery needs of men with prostate cancer. Patient Educ Couns 2003; 49 (3): 233–242.Google Scholar
21. Ormerod, AM, Jessop, AJ. An evaluation of support of patients with prostate cancer during and beyond radiotherapy treatment. A local perspective on future provision. J Radiother Pract 2015; 14 (4): 370–377.Google Scholar
22. Evans, C M, Burnet, N G, Hall, E, Huddart, R A, Nutting, C M, Coles, C E. The Radiotherapy clinical trial research landscape in the UK between 2004 and 2013: A cross-sectional analysis. Clin Oncol 2015; 27 (9): 491–494.Google Scholar
23. Dearnaley, D, Syndikus, I, Mossop, H et al. 8LBA 5 year outcomes of a phase III randomised trial of conventional or hypofractionated high dose intensity modulated radiotherapy for prostate cancer (CRUK/06/016): report from the CHHiP trial investigators group. Eur J Cancer 2015; 51 (3): S712.Google Scholar
24. Van Dongen, AJ. Good clinical practice, a transparent way of life. A review. Comput Med Imaging Graph 2001; 25 (2): 213–216.Google Scholar
25. White, P, McKay, JC. Guidelines and legal requirements, which inform role expansion in radiography. Radiography 2002; 8 (2): 71–78.Google Scholar
26. Høyer, M, Muren, PL, Glimelius, B. The evolution of radiotherapy techniques in the management of prostate cancer. Acta Oncologica 2015; 54 (6): 821–824.Google Scholar
27. Chin, S, Hayden, AJ, Gebski, V, Cross, S, Turner, S L. Long term patient reported urinary function following external beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Clin Oncol 2017; 29 (7): 421–428.Google Scholar
28. Crowther, K, Shepherd, PH, Shiels, P, Jain, S, Mitchell, D. A pilot study of patient reported outcomes evaluating treatment related symptoms and quality of life for men receiving high dose rate brAchytherapy combined with hypo-fractionated radiotherapy or hypo-fractioNated radiotherapy alone for the treatment of localised prostate cancer. tipsRO. 2018; In Press.Google Scholar
29. The Society and College of Radiographers. The prostate/urology specialist cancer workforce: provision of specialist therapeutic radiographers in the treatment and care of men with prostate cancer. 2015. https://www.sor.org/learning/document-library/prostateurology-specialist-cancer-workforce-provision-specialist-therapeutic-radiographers-treatment. Accessed 7th October 2018.Google Scholar
30. Probst, H, Griffiths, S. Job satisfaction of therapy radiographers in the UK: results of a phase I qualitative study. Radiography 2009; 15 (2): 146–157.Google Scholar