{"title":"线性加速器质量保证的改进失效模式及影响分析","authors":"Nicole Jessop DClinSci, Jamie Fairfoul MSc","doi":"10.1016/j.adro.2025.101827","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>Failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) is a proactive method for evaluating failure modes and the consequences of those failures. In radiation therapy, a risk-based approach such as this can be used to inform and drive the quality assurance (QA) program, help prioritize QA, evaluate the impact of any changes to the QA process, and raise awareness of the potential failure modes. A classical FMEA can result in identical risk priority number (RPN) values for different combinations of occurrence, severity, and detectability. This assumes that these 3 values hold the same significance. In radiation therapy, high-severity failure modes can lead to severe clinical consequences and so should be prioritized.</div></div><div><h3>Methods and Materials</h3><div>A classical FMEA was carried out for the Varian TrueBeam linear accelerator QA at Peterborough City Hospital. This highlighted the issue of high-severity failure modes appearing relatively low in the FMEA table because of low overall RPN values. Therefore, a modified FMEA using a new clinical severity factor (S<sup>2</sup>) with hybrid RPN values was proposed and performed.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>None of the failure modes resulted in very high RPN values. Some failure modes with high severities, such as gating system beam hold, breathing trace display, and backup timer operation, had relatively low overall RPN scores. The new modified FMEA minimized this effect by moving these failure modes up the FMEA table. For the modified FMEA, the higher scoring failure modes all relate to machine parameters associated with beam delivery and are important for techniques used for most patients. Therefore, the modified FMEA proposed gave clinically relevant results.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>A new modified FMEA is proposed for linear accelerator QA in radiation therapy. This method is recommended to prevent high-severity failure modes from appearing low in the FMEA table and thus being given a low overall priority.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":7390,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Radiation Oncology","volume":"10 9","pages":"Article 101827"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Modified Failure Mode and Effects Analysis for Linear Accelerator Quality Assurance\",\"authors\":\"Nicole Jessop DClinSci, Jamie Fairfoul MSc\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.adro.2025.101827\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>Failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) is a proactive method for evaluating failure modes and the consequences of those failures. In radiation therapy, a risk-based approach such as this can be used to inform and drive the quality assurance (QA) program, help prioritize QA, evaluate the impact of any changes to the QA process, and raise awareness of the potential failure modes. A classical FMEA can result in identical risk priority number (RPN) values for different combinations of occurrence, severity, and detectability. This assumes that these 3 values hold the same significance. In radiation therapy, high-severity failure modes can lead to severe clinical consequences and so should be prioritized.</div></div><div><h3>Methods and Materials</h3><div>A classical FMEA was carried out for the Varian TrueBeam linear accelerator QA at Peterborough City Hospital. This highlighted the issue of high-severity failure modes appearing relatively low in the FMEA table because of low overall RPN values. Therefore, a modified FMEA using a new clinical severity factor (S<sup>2</sup>) with hybrid RPN values was proposed and performed.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>None of the failure modes resulted in very high RPN values. Some failure modes with high severities, such as gating system beam hold, breathing trace display, and backup timer operation, had relatively low overall RPN scores. The new modified FMEA minimized this effect by moving these failure modes up the FMEA table. For the modified FMEA, the higher scoring failure modes all relate to machine parameters associated with beam delivery and are important for techniques used for most patients. Therefore, the modified FMEA proposed gave clinically relevant results.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>A new modified FMEA is proposed for linear accelerator QA in radiation therapy. This method is recommended to prevent high-severity failure modes from appearing low in the FMEA table and thus being given a low overall priority.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7390,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advances in Radiation Oncology\",\"volume\":\"10 9\",\"pages\":\"Article 101827\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advances in Radiation Oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2452109425001149\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Radiation Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2452109425001149","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
A Modified Failure Mode and Effects Analysis for Linear Accelerator Quality Assurance
Purpose
Failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) is a proactive method for evaluating failure modes and the consequences of those failures. In radiation therapy, a risk-based approach such as this can be used to inform and drive the quality assurance (QA) program, help prioritize QA, evaluate the impact of any changes to the QA process, and raise awareness of the potential failure modes. A classical FMEA can result in identical risk priority number (RPN) values for different combinations of occurrence, severity, and detectability. This assumes that these 3 values hold the same significance. In radiation therapy, high-severity failure modes can lead to severe clinical consequences and so should be prioritized.
Methods and Materials
A classical FMEA was carried out for the Varian TrueBeam linear accelerator QA at Peterborough City Hospital. This highlighted the issue of high-severity failure modes appearing relatively low in the FMEA table because of low overall RPN values. Therefore, a modified FMEA using a new clinical severity factor (S2) with hybrid RPN values was proposed and performed.
Results
None of the failure modes resulted in very high RPN values. Some failure modes with high severities, such as gating system beam hold, breathing trace display, and backup timer operation, had relatively low overall RPN scores. The new modified FMEA minimized this effect by moving these failure modes up the FMEA table. For the modified FMEA, the higher scoring failure modes all relate to machine parameters associated with beam delivery and are important for techniques used for most patients. Therefore, the modified FMEA proposed gave clinically relevant results.
Conclusions
A new modified FMEA is proposed for linear accelerator QA in radiation therapy. This method is recommended to prevent high-severity failure modes from appearing low in the FMEA table and thus being given a low overall priority.
期刊介绍:
The purpose of Advances is to provide information for clinicians who use radiation therapy by publishing: Clinical trial reports and reanalyses. Basic science original reports. Manuscripts examining health services research, comparative and cost effectiveness research, and systematic reviews. Case reports documenting unusual problems and solutions. High quality multi and single institutional series, as well as other novel retrospective hypothesis generating series. Timely critical reviews on important topics in radiation oncology, such as side effects. Articles reporting the natural history of disease and patterns of failure, particularly as they relate to treatment volume delineation. Articles on safety and quality in radiation therapy. Essays on clinical experience. Articles on practice transformation in radiation oncology, in particular: Aspects of health policy that may impact the future practice of radiation oncology. How information technology, such as data analytics and systems innovations, will change radiation oncology practice. Articles on imaging as they relate to radiation therapy treatment.