...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Radiotherapy and oncology: Journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology >Inter-professional variability in the assignment and recording of acute toxicity grade using the RTOG system during prostate radiotherapy.
【24h】

Inter-professional variability in the assignment and recording of acute toxicity grade using the RTOG system during prostate radiotherapy.

机译：前列腺放疗期间使用RTOG系统确定和记录急性毒性等级的专业间差异。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To compare the routine acute toxicity documentation practices of therapists and oncologists using the RTOG lower GI and GU scales. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Ninety consecutive prostate radiotherapy patients were identified. The weekly urinary and rectal acute toxicity grades routinely documented by therapists and oncologists were collected retrospectively from radiotherapy charts. These data were paired together, and compared between the professional groups. RESULTS: Only RTOG acute toxicity grades between 0 and 2 were recorded by either group. The overall rate of documentation was high (97% therapists/86% oncologists), but the rate of quantitative documentation was low from the oncologists (46%) who used a free-form text field for recording purposes. There was no significant difference in the incidence of maximum grade of acute toxicity reported by either professional group (p>0.1). There was good RTOG score concordance between the observer groups (kappa=0.756), with pair-wise absolute agreement in 76%. Pair-wise discrepancies between the observers were commonly attributable to differences in the time/date of assessment. CONCLUSIONS: Despite some methodological limitations, this study found that therapist-assessed RTOG acute toxicity grades demonstrated a good level of agreement with the grades assigned by their oncologist colleagues.
机译：背景与目的：为了比较使用RTOG较低GI和GU量表的治疗师和肿瘤学家的常规急性毒性文献记录做法。方法和材料：确定了90例连续的前列腺放射治疗患者。从放射治疗图上回顾性地收集了治疗师和肿瘤学家常规记录的每周尿液和直肠急性毒性等级。将这些数据配对在一起，并在专业组之间进行比较。结果：两组均仅记录RTOG急性毒性等级介于0和2之间。总体记录率很高（97％的治疗师是86％的肿瘤学家），但是定量记录的比率却很低，而使用自由格式文本字段进行记录的肿瘤学家（46％）却很少。任一专业小组报告的最大急性毒性等级的发生率均无显着差异（p> 0.1）。观察者组之间的RTOG评分具有良好的一致性（kappa = 0.756），成对的绝对一致性为76％。观察者之间的成对差异通常归因于评估时间/日期的差异。结论：尽管有一些方法学上的限制，但这项研究发现，治疗师评估的RTOG急性毒性等级与他们的肿瘤医师同事指定的等级具有很好的一致性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号