Lesley Hoyle

Quantitative assessment of workload and stressors in clinical radiation oncology

PURPOSE Workload level and sources of stressors have been implicated as sources of error in multiple settings. We assessed workload levels and sources of stressors among radiation oncology professionals. Furthermore, we explored the potential association between workload and the frequency of reported radiotherapy incidents by the World Health Organization (WHO). METHODS AND MATERIALS Data collection was aimed at various tasks performed by 21 study participants from different radiation oncology professional subgroups (simulation therapists, radiation therapists, physicists, dosimetrists, and physicians). Workload was assessed using National Aeronautics and Space Administration Task-Load Index (NASA TLX). Sources of stressors were quantified using observational methods and segregated using a standard taxonomy. Comparisons between professional subgroups and tasks were made using analysis of variance ANOVA, multivariate ANOVA, and Duncan test. An association between workload levels (NASA TLX) and the frequency of radiotherapy incidents (WHO incidents) was explored (Pearson correlation test). RESULTS A total of 173 workload assessments were obtained. Overall, simulation therapists had relatively low workloads (NASA TLX range, 30-36), and physicists had relatively high workloads (NASA TLX range, 51-63). NASA TLX scores for physicians, radiation therapists, and dosimetrists ranged from 40-52. There was marked intertask/professional subgroup variation (P<.0001). Mental demand (P<.001), physical demand (P=.001), and effort (P=.006) significantly differed among professional subgroups. Typically, there were 3-5 stressors per cycle of analyzed tasks with the following distribution: interruptions (41.4%), time factors (17%), technical factors (13.6%), teamwork issues (11.6%), patient factors (9.0%), and environmental factors (7.4%). A positive association between workload and frequency of reported radiotherapy incidents by the WHO was found (r = 0.87, P value=.045). CONCLUSIONS Workload level and sources of stressors vary among professional subgroups. Understanding the factors that influence these findings can guide adjustments to the workflow procedures, physical layout, and/or communication protocols to enhance safety. Additional evaluations are needed in order to better understand if these findings are systemic.

Relating physician's workload with errors during radiation therapy planning.

PURPOSE To relate subjective workload (WL) levels to errors for routine clinical tasks. METHODS AND MATERIALS Nine physicians (4 faculty and 5 residents) each performed 3 radiation therapy planning cases. The WL levels were subjectively assessed using National Aeronautics and Space Administration Task Load Index (NASA-TLX). Individual performance was assessed objectively based on the severity grade of errors. The relationship between the WL and performance was assessed via ordinal logistic regression. RESULTS There was an increased rate of severity grade of errors with increasing WL (P value = .02). As the majority of the higher NASA-TLX scores, and the majority of the performance errors were in the residents, our findings are likely most pertinent to radiation oncology centers with training programs. CONCLUSIONS WL levels may be an important factor contributing to errors during radiation therapy planning tasks.