No abstract

Much of the research conducted in radiotherapy focuses on technology advances; however, research may also be warranted in the area of patient care. The aims of this paper are to (1) identify patient care-related research priorities in radiation therapy and (2) describe similarities and differences in radiation therapists' responses to research priorities related to patient care by subgroups revealed through cluster analysis. A Delphi process was used, examining problems in research that radiation therapists face. Three hundred and seventy-four problems were identified. These were translated into 53 research areas which were then prioritised. Participant subgroups were identified using a hierarchical cluster procedure. Agreement and disagreement between subgroups for the subscale of 'Patient Care' were analysed with ANOVA and post hoc Scheffe multiple comparisons. The three subgroups had varying degrees of research interest in patient care. The groups agreed on the importance of research in relation to patient care in reducing and managing side effects, patient education and support, and treatment techniques. However, there was disagreement about the importance of conducting research into the role of radiation therapists, radiation therapists communicating and educating patients, and psychosocial support. Further research is warranted to determine radiotherapy patients' priorities and improve evidence-based practice.

Radiation therapists (RTs) need to engage more in research for the benefit of their patients and their own professional development. However, radiation therapy in Australia is new to research with an undeveloped research culture, so RTs need direction when wishing to embark upon research projects. This manuscript provides the results of the first stage of a Delphi process aimed at defining RTs' areas of research interest. Questionnaires were sent to all Australian departments of radiation oncology (n = 41) asking for a group in each department to identify what problems they experienced while treating patients or working with colleagues, and what areas of radiation therapy they felt required further research by radiation therapists. The response rate was 70.7%. Of the designated RTs who collected the data, 82.8% had greater than 10 years experience and 48.1% had postgraduate qualifications. Two of the researchers categorised the responses and derived a list of themes to describe the identified questions. Of 410 research questions, 374 could be coded (91.2%). The categories defined were “Staff issues” (58.3%), “Technical issues” (28.9%) and “Patient related issues” (12.9%). The RTs were interested in many research areas, but it is of concern that the largest theme identified was “Staff issues”, which could indicate some dissatisfaction in the workplace. However, it was clear that RTs are thinking about their practice and identifying gaps in knowledge in the technical and patient related areas. The second stage of this project was to create research areas that represented the themes identified in this first stage and send them back to the radiation oncology departments for prioritising; these data are currently being analysed.

This quality improvement project was implemented to address the communication gap in the care of complex patients who require prolonged hospitalizations. By identifying this need, engaging stakeholders, and developing a family meeting plan to meet to address these needs, communication between all members of the patient's care team has improved.