Use of an artificial intelligence program in radiation therapy

2020

Closed access Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.52532/2663-4864-2020-4-58-41-43
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

Relevance: Since 01 January 2020, the provision of radiation therapy (RT) at Almaty Oncology Center was optimized using the Visual Care Path (VCP) tool of the ARIA 15.6 oncology system, which supports the implementation of sequential and parallel mandatory procedures – from patient registration to completion of treatment. The purpose was to study the impact of the implemented artificial intelligence system on RT effectiveness, safety, the share of complex RT techniques, and measure staff satisfaction and proficiency. Results: The share of intensive modulated radiation therapy sessions changed from 39.3% in 2019 to 46.6% in 2020. After the implementation of VCP, timely pre-irradiation preparation of patients (centering, delineation, dose prescription) by department doctors increased from 76% to 91%, OR = 3.2; timely measurements of plans increased from 85% to 96%, OR = 4.7; the frequency of major events (the ratio of plans with errors or unsuccessful plans to the total number of plans, delineation of organs at risk and targets, dose prescription) decreased from 12% to 3%, OR = 4.5; the frequency of minor events (late notification of the patient of the treatment commencement, timely transition to the next stage of patient preparation for treatment decreased from 32% to 10%, OR = 4.5. Staff proficiency in VCP has increased by 75%. Following the anonymous survey results, 85% of staff reported a positive impact of VCP on the workflow. Conclusion: The share of complex methods of RT has increased by 7.3%. The implementation of VCP significantly increased the workflow efficiency – by 3.9 times, reduced the number of major and minor events by 4.4 times. It allowed using a paperless communication with the executor’s identification at each stage of RT. The new technique was also quickly adopted and favorably accepted by the staff.