Developing and implementing a Radiotherapy Research Activity Assessment Tool (RAAT): a prospective feasibility study

Abstract

AimCancer research in the National Health Service has increased by 10·5% in 3 years since the formation of the National Cancer Research networks in 2000. The initial enthusiasm from clinical staffs to embark on a project has to be balanced against the implications of resources, costs and other developments. There is no standardised method to assess the impact of research projects on clinical practice. The aim of this project was to develop and implement a Radiotherapy Research Activity Assessment Tool (RAAT) to assess the feasibility of newly proposed projects within clinical settings.Methods and materialsA multi-step development method was used. The steps involved the principles of quality function deployment. The consecutive steps involved developing a user-friendly and replicable tool and would fit on one A4 page. The process involved multi-professionals and patients throughout the design process. The tool was preliminary tested on usability among eight stakeholders on a ten-point scale (1=poor; 10=very good). Percentage agreement was evaluated at 6 month post initial RAAT assessment scoring by the seven multi-disciplinary team (MDT) members.FindingsThe RAAT was developed in an e-form available in Microsoft Excel. The tool scored a mode of 6 for usability. Interrater reliability testing between the radiotherapy MDT resulted in 88% agreement. The RAAT seems to be feasible in clinical practice, and provide a framework to guide the decision-making process. The study calls for further testing of usability and review of long-term implications on all stakeholders.

Optimising real time clinical librarian support to enhance the evidence base in radiotherapy clinical protocols

“…New teams are professionally driven to adopt the latest practice to ensure the best possible outcome for patients. However, there can be delays in the latest evidence reaching practice for logistical reasons such as resources and time (Goldsworthy, Roe, McGrail, McCormack & Walther, 2016). The Radiotherapy service within the cancer centre had implemented clinical protocols as the centre opened in 2009; however; these had not been updated systematically with recent evidence in the intervening years.…”