[Evaluation of the Position Matching Accuracy for Radiological Technologists and Radiation Oncologists in Image-guided Radiation Therapy].

Tatsuya Yoshida, Tomoki Hayakawa, Toshiyuki Kawadai, Takako Shibasaki, Kazuya Nagata, Tetsuya Aoki
{"title":"[Evaluation of the Position Matching Accuracy for Radiological Technologists and Radiation Oncologists in Image-guided Radiation Therapy].","authors":"Tatsuya Yoshida, Tomoki Hayakawa, Toshiyuki Kawadai, Takako Shibasaki, Kazuya Nagata, Tetsuya Aoki","doi":"10.6009/jjrt.25-1585","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The promotion of task-shifting and task-sharing to facilitate work style reform for physicians has enabled radiological technologists (RTs) to perform primary matching in image-guided radiotherapy. The purpose in this study is to evaluate the position matching accuracy of RTs and radiation oncologist (ROs).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Position matching was performed by four RTs and two ROs (RO-A and B). To evaluate the accuracy of the observer's position matching, five cases each were identified for the head, neck, chest, and pelvic regions in two-dimension planar images (2D/2D), and for the prostate in three-dimensional (3D) images (CBCT). Manual position matching was performed using the offline matching of the position matching analysis software at a position moved by 3-7 mm in the XYZ directions from the treatment position at the time of treatment. Inter-observer position matching accuracy was evaluated by calculating the difference between the treatment position and the matching position, and by calculating a 3D vector from the above difference.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The differences between the irradiation position and the reference position were within ±1.0 mm for 2D/2D and within ±1.5 mm for CBCT for the four RTs, while the maximum differences for RO-A were 3.0 mm and 3.5 mm, respectively. For 3D vectors, in 2D/2D, the values for four RTs and RO-B were 0.1-0.6 mm, compared to RO-A was 1.2-1.7 mm, and in CBCT, the values for four RTs were 0.3-0.7 mm, compared to the two ROs' were 1.3 mm and 1.4 mm.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The position matching accuracy of our RTs was not inferior to that of ROs, confirming that primary matching by RTs is clinically acceptable.</p>","PeriodicalId":74309,"journal":{"name":"Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai zasshi","volume":"81 12","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai zasshi","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.6009/jjrt.25-1585","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The promotion of task-shifting and task-sharing to facilitate work style reform for physicians has enabled radiological technologists (RTs) to perform primary matching in image-guided radiotherapy. The purpose in this study is to evaluate the position matching accuracy of RTs and radiation oncologist (ROs).

Methods: Position matching was performed by four RTs and two ROs (RO-A and B). To evaluate the accuracy of the observer's position matching, five cases each were identified for the head, neck, chest, and pelvic regions in two-dimension planar images (2D/2D), and for the prostate in three-dimensional (3D) images (CBCT). Manual position matching was performed using the offline matching of the position matching analysis software at a position moved by 3-7 mm in the XYZ directions from the treatment position at the time of treatment. Inter-observer position matching accuracy was evaluated by calculating the difference between the treatment position and the matching position, and by calculating a 3D vector from the above difference.

Results: The differences between the irradiation position and the reference position were within ±1.0 mm for 2D/2D and within ±1.5 mm for CBCT for the four RTs, while the maximum differences for RO-A were 3.0 mm and 3.5 mm, respectively. For 3D vectors, in 2D/2D, the values for four RTs and RO-B were 0.1-0.6 mm, compared to RO-A was 1.2-1.7 mm, and in CBCT, the values for four RTs were 0.3-0.7 mm, compared to the two ROs' were 1.3 mm and 1.4 mm.

Conclusion: The position matching accuracy of our RTs was not inferior to that of ROs, confirming that primary matching by RTs is clinically acceptable.

影像引导放射治疗中放射技师和放射肿瘤学家位置匹配精度的评价
目的:促进任务转移和任务共享以促进医生的工作方式改革,使放射技术人员(RTs)能够在图像引导放射治疗中进行初级匹配。本研究的目的是评估放射肿瘤学家(ROs)和放射肿瘤学家(rt)的位置匹配准确性。方法:采用4个rt和2个ro (RO-A和ro - B)进行位置匹配。为了评估观察者位置匹配的准确性,在二维平面图像(2D/2D)中分别识别了5例头部、颈部、胸部和骨盆区域,以及在三维图像(CBCT)中识别了前列腺区域。使用位置匹配分析软件离线匹配,在距治疗位置在XYZ方向上移动3- 7mm的位置进行手动位置匹配。通过计算处理位置与匹配位置的差值,并根据差值计算三维向量,评估观察者间位置匹配精度。结果:4种RTs的照射位置与参考位置的差异2D/2D在±1.0 mm内,CBCT在±1.5 mm内,RO-A最大差异分别为3.0 mm和3.5 mm。对于3D载体,在2D/2D中,4个RTs和RO-B的值为0.1-0.6 mm,而RO-A的值为1.2-1.7 mm;在CBCT中,4个RTs的值为0.3-0.7 mm,而2个ROs的值为1.3 mm和1.4 mm。结论:我们的RTs的位置匹配精度不低于ROs,证实了RTs的初步匹配在临床上是可以接受的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信