Academic program recommendations for graduate degrees in medical physics: AAPM Report No. 365 (Revision of Report No. 197)

BackgroundThis study utilizes interviews of clinical medical physicists to investigate self‐reported shortcomings of the current weekly chart check workflow and opportunities for improvement.MethodsNineteen medical physicists were recruited for a 30‐minute semi‐structured interview, with a particular focus placed on image review and the use of automated tools for image review in weekly checks. Survey‐type questions were used to gather quantitative information about chart check practices and importance placed on reducing chart check workloads versus increasing chart check effectiveness. Open‐ended questions were used to probe respondents about their current weekly chart check workflow, opinions of the value of weekly chart checks and perceived shortcomings, and barriers and facilitators to the implementation of automated chart check tools. Thematic analysis was used to develop common themes across the interviews.ResultsPhysicists ranked highly the value of reducing the time spent on weekly chart checks (average 6.3 on a scale from 1 to 10), but placed more value on increasing the effectiveness of checks with an average of 9.2 on a 1–10 scale. Four major themes were identified: (1) weekly chart checks need to adapt to an electronic record‐and‐verify chart environment, (2) physicists could add value to patient care by analyzing images without duplicating the work done by physicians, (3) greater support for trending analysis is needed in weekly checks, and (4) automation has the potential to increase the value of physics checks.ConclusionThis study identified several key shortcomings of the current weekly chart check process from the perspective of the clinical medical physicist. Our results show strong support for automating components of the weekly check workflow in order to allow for more effective checks that emphasize follow‐up, trending, failure modes and effects analysis, and allow time to be spent on other higher value tasks that improve patient safety.

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Clinical physicists’ perceptions of weekly chart checks and the potential role for automated image review assessed by structured interviews

Petragallo,

Luximon,

Neylon

et al. 2024

“…The use of concept inventories has also demonstrated the capability of identifying teaching methods, such as active learning techniques, which help overcome weaknesses and misconceptions in student understanding. Significant efforts have been made to develop the relevant content 20 and to identify the most successful teaching strategies with the American Association of Physicists in Medicine. The development and deployment of concept inventories would help instructors both identify important impediments in the teaching of these concepts and provide a tool to evaluate changes in teaching strategies.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Introduction to concept inventories for medical physics education

Cetnar,

Besemer,

Bry

et al. 2023

Self Cite

Concept inventories are multiple choice exams designed with the intention to test core concepts on specific subjects and evaluate common misconceptions. These tests serve as a useful tool in the classroom to assess value added by the instructor's educational methods and to better understand how students learn. They can provide educators with a method to evaluate their current teaching strategies and to make modifications that enhance student learning and ultimately elevate the quality of medical physics education. The use of concept inventories in introductory college physics courses revealed important gaps in conceptual understanding of physics by undergraduate students and motivated a shift of physics teaching towards more effective methods, such as active learning techniques. The goal of this review is to introduce medical physicists to concept inventories as educational evaluation tools and discuss potential applications to medical physics education by development through multi‐institutional collaboration.

“…Task Group Recommendation . Certificate programs shall include professionalism, leadership, and ethics as a component within their core curriculum as specified in AAPM Report 365 11 . Further review of the didactic requirements for alternative pathway candidates are currently underway by the Working Group on Medical Physics Graduate Education Program Curriculum and are expected to be included in AAPM Report 365.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

AAPM Task Group 298: Recommendations on certificate program/alternative pathway candidate education and training

Prisciandaro

Burmeister

DeLuca

et al. 2022

Entry into the field of clinical medical physics is most commonly accomplished through the completion of a Commission on Accreditation of Medical Physics Educational Programs (CAMPEP)‐accredited graduate and residency program. To allow a mechanism to bring valuable expertise from other disciplines into clinical practice in medical physics, an “alternative pathway” approach was also established. To ensure those trainees who have completed a doctoral degree in physics or a related discipline have the appropriate background and didactic training in medical physics, certificate programs and a CAMPEP‐accreditation process for these programs were initiated. However, medical physics–specific didactic, research, and clinical exposure of those entering medical physics residencies from these certificate programs is often comparatively modest when evaluated against individuals holding Master's and/or Doctoral degrees in CAMPEP‐accredited graduate programs. In 2016, the AAPM approved the formation of Task Group (TG) 298, “Alternative Pathway Candidate Education and Training.” The TG was charged with reviewing previous published recommendations for alternative pathway candidates and developing recommendations on the appropriate education and training of these candidates. This manuscript is a summary of the AAPM TG 298 report.