Loading…

TRUFU: Therapeutic radiographer undertaking follow up for prostate cancer patients

A study was proposed to examine the impact to patients and the Oncology review team, of extending the role of the Therapeutic Radiographer to undertake follow up review of prostate cancer patients who have completed a radical course of external beam radiotherapy treatment. A total of 30 patients att...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Radiography (London, England. 1995) England. 1995), 2018-11, Vol.24 (4), p.298-303
Main Authors: Hetherington, S.M., Gilleece, T., Shepherd, P., Crowther, K., O'Sullivan, J., Jain, S., Mitchell, D., Shum, L., Turner, P.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-79d79a04a8827685424bf3ce269673d59c810a173dce92ed8016ff5e3f308e8f3
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-79d79a04a8827685424bf3ce269673d59c810a173dce92ed8016ff5e3f308e8f3
container_end_page 303
container_issue 4
container_start_page 298
container_title Radiography (London, England. 1995)
container_volume 24
creator Hetherington, S.M.
Gilleece, T.
Shepherd, P.
Crowther, K.
O'Sullivan, J.
Jain, S.
Mitchell, D.
Shum, L.
Turner, P.
description A study was proposed to examine the impact to patients and the Oncology review team, of extending the role of the Therapeutic Radiographer to undertake follow up review of prostate cancer patients who have completed a radical course of external beam radiotherapy treatment. A total of 30 patients attending for routine radiotherapy follow up were included in an observational study. Patients were assigned for review with a Doctor or a Therapeutic Radiographer using 1:1 randomisation and a number of time points were recorded and analysed. Of the 44 patients screened, 30 patients were recruited. Average time from scheduled appointment time to departure from clinic was 36 min for both the doctor and Therapeutic Radiographer. The average length of Consultation was 19 min for the Therapeutic Radiographer and 10 min for the Doctor. Average length of wait for patients from scheduled appointment time to being taken for review was 17 min for the Therapeutic Radiographer and 25 min for the Doctor. Of the patients who completed questionnaires, 23/28 had no preference of reviewer, 2/28 declared a preference to be seen by a doctor, whilst 3/28 stated a preference for review with a Therapeutic Radiographer. The results of the study are encouraging and should be further investigated in an attempt of developing what would be a very rewarding aspect of the Therapeutic Radiographers role. •Therapeutic Radiographer able to take patients for review quicker than doctor.•Therapeutic Radiographer able to offer patients longer consultation.•More study participants stated preference for review with Therapeutic Radiographer.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.radi.2018.06.001
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2117158176</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1078817418300798</els_id><sourcerecordid>2117158176</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-79d79a04a8827685424bf3ce269673d59c810a173dce92ed8016ff5e3f308e8f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kM1OwzAQhC0EoqXwAhxQjlwS1nZ-HMQFVRSQKiFV7dlynU1xSZNgOyDeHlcFjpw8Xn072hlCLikkFGh-s02sqkzCgIoE8gSAHpExzTiLmeD0OGgoRCxokY7ImXNbAGApE6dkxIGVLC2LMVksF6vZ6jZavqJVPQ7e6Gjv2m3CN8yioa3QevVm2k1Ud03TfUZDH5SNets5rzxGWrU6kL3yBlvvzslJrRqHFz_vhKxmD8vpUzx_eXye3s9jnQL4uCirolSQKiFYkYssZem65hpZXuYFr7JSCwqKBqmxZFiJELmuM-Q1B4Gi5hNyffANh7wP6LzcGaexaVSL3eAko7SgWYifB5QdUB1udhZr2VuzU_ZLUpD7LuVW7lPLfZcSchm6DEtXP_7DeofV38pveQG4OwAYUn4YtNLp0IDGyljUXlad-c__G3kuhSM</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2117158176</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>TRUFU: Therapeutic radiographer undertaking follow up for prostate cancer patients</title><source>ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Hetherington, S.M. ; Gilleece, T. ; Shepherd, P. ; Crowther, K. ; O'Sullivan, J. ; Jain, S. ; Mitchell, D. ; Shum, L. ; Turner, P.</creator><creatorcontrib>Hetherington, S.M. ; Gilleece, T. ; Shepherd, P. ; Crowther, K. ; O'Sullivan, J. ; Jain, S. ; Mitchell, D. ; Shum, L. ; Turner, P.</creatorcontrib><description>A study was proposed to examine the impact to patients and the Oncology review team, of extending the role of the Therapeutic Radiographer to undertake follow up review of prostate cancer patients who have completed a radical course of external beam radiotherapy treatment. A total of 30 patients attending for routine radiotherapy follow up were included in an observational study. Patients were assigned for review with a Doctor or a Therapeutic Radiographer using 1:1 randomisation and a number of time points were recorded and analysed. Of the 44 patients screened, 30 patients were recruited. Average time from scheduled appointment time to departure from clinic was 36 min for both the doctor and Therapeutic Radiographer. The average length of Consultation was 19 min for the Therapeutic Radiographer and 10 min for the Doctor. Average length of wait for patients from scheduled appointment time to being taken for review was 17 min for the Therapeutic Radiographer and 25 min for the Doctor. Of the patients who completed questionnaires, 23/28 had no preference of reviewer, 2/28 declared a preference to be seen by a doctor, whilst 3/28 stated a preference for review with a Therapeutic Radiographer. The results of the study are encouraging and should be further investigated in an attempt of developing what would be a very rewarding aspect of the Therapeutic Radiographers role. •Therapeutic Radiographer able to take patients for review quicker than doctor.•Therapeutic Radiographer able to offer patients longer consultation.•More study participants stated preference for review with Therapeutic Radiographer.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1078-8174</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1532-2831</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.radi.2018.06.001</identifier><identifier>PMID: 30292497</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Observational ; Oncology ; Patient management ; Patient satisfaction ; Review ; Role development</subject><ispartof>Radiography (London, England. 1995), 2018-11, Vol.24 (4), p.298-303</ispartof><rights>2018 The College of Radiographers</rights><rights>Copyright © 2018 The College of Radiographers. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-79d79a04a8827685424bf3ce269673d59c810a173dce92ed8016ff5e3f308e8f3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-79d79a04a8827685424bf3ce269673d59c810a173dce92ed8016ff5e3f308e8f3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27903,27904</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30292497$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Hetherington, S.M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gilleece, T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shepherd, P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Crowther, K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>O'Sullivan, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jain, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mitchell, D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shum, L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Turner, P.</creatorcontrib><title>TRUFU: Therapeutic radiographer undertaking follow up for prostate cancer patients</title><title>Radiography (London, England. 1995)</title><addtitle>Radiography (Lond)</addtitle><description>A study was proposed to examine the impact to patients and the Oncology review team, of extending the role of the Therapeutic Radiographer to undertake follow up review of prostate cancer patients who have completed a radical course of external beam radiotherapy treatment. A total of 30 patients attending for routine radiotherapy follow up were included in an observational study. Patients were assigned for review with a Doctor or a Therapeutic Radiographer using 1:1 randomisation and a number of time points were recorded and analysed. Of the 44 patients screened, 30 patients were recruited. Average time from scheduled appointment time to departure from clinic was 36 min for both the doctor and Therapeutic Radiographer. The average length of Consultation was 19 min for the Therapeutic Radiographer and 10 min for the Doctor. Average length of wait for patients from scheduled appointment time to being taken for review was 17 min for the Therapeutic Radiographer and 25 min for the Doctor. Of the patients who completed questionnaires, 23/28 had no preference of reviewer, 2/28 declared a preference to be seen by a doctor, whilst 3/28 stated a preference for review with a Therapeutic Radiographer. The results of the study are encouraging and should be further investigated in an attempt of developing what would be a very rewarding aspect of the Therapeutic Radiographers role. •Therapeutic Radiographer able to take patients for review quicker than doctor.•Therapeutic Radiographer able to offer patients longer consultation.•More study participants stated preference for review with Therapeutic Radiographer.</description><subject>Observational</subject><subject>Oncology</subject><subject>Patient management</subject><subject>Patient satisfaction</subject><subject>Review</subject><subject>Role development</subject><issn>1078-8174</issn><issn>1532-2831</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kM1OwzAQhC0EoqXwAhxQjlwS1nZ-HMQFVRSQKiFV7dlynU1xSZNgOyDeHlcFjpw8Xn072hlCLikkFGh-s02sqkzCgIoE8gSAHpExzTiLmeD0OGgoRCxokY7ImXNbAGApE6dkxIGVLC2LMVksF6vZ6jZavqJVPQ7e6Gjv2m3CN8yioa3QevVm2k1Ud03TfUZDH5SNets5rzxGWrU6kL3yBlvvzslJrRqHFz_vhKxmD8vpUzx_eXye3s9jnQL4uCirolSQKiFYkYssZem65hpZXuYFr7JSCwqKBqmxZFiJELmuM-Q1B4Gi5hNyffANh7wP6LzcGaexaVSL3eAko7SgWYifB5QdUB1udhZr2VuzU_ZLUpD7LuVW7lPLfZcSchm6DEtXP_7DeofV38pveQG4OwAYUn4YtNLp0IDGyljUXlad-c__G3kuhSM</recordid><startdate>201811</startdate><enddate>201811</enddate><creator>Hetherington, S.M.</creator><creator>Gilleece, T.</creator><creator>Shepherd, P.</creator><creator>Crowther, K.</creator><creator>O'Sullivan, J.</creator><creator>Jain, S.</creator><creator>Mitchell, D.</creator><creator>Shum, L.</creator><creator>Turner, P.</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201811</creationdate><title>TRUFU: Therapeutic radiographer undertaking follow up for prostate cancer patients</title><author>Hetherington, S.M. ; Gilleece, T. ; Shepherd, P. ; Crowther, K. ; O'Sullivan, J. ; Jain, S. ; Mitchell, D. ; Shum, L. ; Turner, P.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-79d79a04a8827685424bf3ce269673d59c810a173dce92ed8016ff5e3f308e8f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Observational</topic><topic>Oncology</topic><topic>Patient management</topic><topic>Patient satisfaction</topic><topic>Review</topic><topic>Role development</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Hetherington, S.M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gilleece, T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shepherd, P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Crowther, K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>O'Sullivan, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jain, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mitchell, D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shum, L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Turner, P.</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Radiography (London, England. 1995)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Hetherington, S.M.</au><au>Gilleece, T.</au><au>Shepherd, P.</au><au>Crowther, K.</au><au>O'Sullivan, J.</au><au>Jain, S.</au><au>Mitchell, D.</au><au>Shum, L.</au><au>Turner, P.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>TRUFU: Therapeutic radiographer undertaking follow up for prostate cancer patients</atitle><jtitle>Radiography (London, England. 1995)</jtitle><addtitle>Radiography (Lond)</addtitle><date>2018-11</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>24</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>298</spage><epage>303</epage><pages>298-303</pages><issn>1078-8174</issn><eissn>1532-2831</eissn><abstract>A study was proposed to examine the impact to patients and the Oncology review team, of extending the role of the Therapeutic Radiographer to undertake follow up review of prostate cancer patients who have completed a radical course of external beam radiotherapy treatment. A total of 30 patients attending for routine radiotherapy follow up were included in an observational study. Patients were assigned for review with a Doctor or a Therapeutic Radiographer using 1:1 randomisation and a number of time points were recorded and analysed. Of the 44 patients screened, 30 patients were recruited. Average time from scheduled appointment time to departure from clinic was 36 min for both the doctor and Therapeutic Radiographer. The average length of Consultation was 19 min for the Therapeutic Radiographer and 10 min for the Doctor. Average length of wait for patients from scheduled appointment time to being taken for review was 17 min for the Therapeutic Radiographer and 25 min for the Doctor. Of the patients who completed questionnaires, 23/28 had no preference of reviewer, 2/28 declared a preference to be seen by a doctor, whilst 3/28 stated a preference for review with a Therapeutic Radiographer. The results of the study are encouraging and should be further investigated in an attempt of developing what would be a very rewarding aspect of the Therapeutic Radiographers role. •Therapeutic Radiographer able to take patients for review quicker than doctor.•Therapeutic Radiographer able to offer patients longer consultation.•More study participants stated preference for review with Therapeutic Radiographer.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>30292497</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.radi.2018.06.001</doi><tpages>6</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1078-8174
ispartof Radiography (London, England. 1995), 2018-11, Vol.24 (4), p.298-303
issn 1078-8174
1532-2831
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2117158176
source ScienceDirect Journals
subjects Observational
Oncology
Patient management
Patient satisfaction
Review
Role development
title TRUFU: Therapeutic radiographer undertaking follow up for prostate cancer patients
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-22T19%3A09%3A27IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=TRUFU:%20Therapeutic%20radiographer%20undertaking%20follow%20up%20for%20prostate%20cancer%20patients&rft.jtitle=Radiography%20(London,%20England.%201995)&rft.au=Hetherington,%20S.M.&rft.date=2018-11&rft.volume=24&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=298&rft.epage=303&rft.pages=298-303&rft.issn=1078-8174&rft.eissn=1532-2831&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.radi.2018.06.001&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2117158176%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-79d79a04a8827685424bf3ce269673d59c810a173dce92ed8016ff5e3f308e8f3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2117158176&rft_id=info:pmid/30292497&rfr_iscdi=true