Updated Analysis of a Multi-Institutional Radiation Oncology Clerkship Curriculum: A Report From the Radiation Oncology Education Collaborative Study Group International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics POSTER VIEWING ABSTRACT| VOLUME 96, ISSUE 2, SUPPLEMENT , E412, OCTOBER 01, 2016
Date
10/01/2016Abstract
Purpose/Objective(s)
A standardized radiation oncology curriculum for the medical student radiation oncology clerkship was implemented at select academic medical centers (AMCs) from 2013-2015. Here we report combined evaluation data for the 2013-2015 academic years.
Materials/Methods
A standardized curriculum was developed consisting of 3 lectures (Overview of Radiation Oncology, Radiation Biology/Physics, and Practical Aspects of Simulation/Radiation Emergencies) and an interactive hands-on planning workshop. The planning workshop exposed students to basics of contouring and treatment planning. Students were asked to complete an anonymous evaluation of the curriculum using Likert-type scales (1 = “not at all,” 2 = “somewhat,” 3 = “moderately, 4 = “quite,” and 5 = “extremely.” Likert-type data are reported as median [interquartile range]. Non-parametric statistical tests were used to compare pre- and post-curriculum scores.
Results
363 students at 18 AMCs completed the curriculum during the 2013-15 calendar years. 179 (49.3%) completed evaluations, reported intent to pursue radiation oncology, and reported that this was their first time receiving the curriculum. Subsequent data are reported for these 179 students. Student ratings of the importance of curricular content were: Overview 4 [4-5]; Radiation Biology/Physics 5 [4-5]; Practical Aspects/Radiation Emergencies 5 [4-5]; Planning Workshop 5 [4-5]. The planning workshop improved student comfort with treatment planning (pre 2 [1-2] vs post 3 [3-4], P <0.01), using a planning workstation (pre 2 [1-3] vs post 3 [3-4], P <0.01), and understanding of an AP/PA spine plan (pre 2 [1-3] vs post 4 [3-4], P <0.01). Students also reported the curriculum helped them to understand radiation oncology as a specialty (5 [4-5]), increased specialty decision comfort (4 [3-5]), and would help the transition to radiation oncology residency (5 [4-5]).
Conclusion
A standardized radiation oncology clerkship curriculum was developed and implemented at 18 AMCs during the 2013-2015 calendar years, providing proof-of-principle that radiation oncology curriculum development can follow the multi-institutional cooperative group research model. Additionally, subsequent to participation in the curriculum, students felt more comfortable with their specialty decision and better prepared to begin radiation oncology residency. Further curriculum enhancement for radiation oncology trainees, including both medical students and residents, can be pursued using this model.
Author List
G. Kauffmann, J.R. Gunther, S.E. Braunstein, W. Hara, A. Spektor, J.V. Brower, J.M. Stahl, Y.J. Rao, J. Vargo, J.C. Ye, E.C. Fields, C.R. Thomas, Jr, K.L. Du, T.J. Kruser, R.B. Jimenez, A.E. Hirsch, A.D. Currey, R. Yechieli, P. Mohindra, and D.W. GoldenAuthor
Adam Currey MD Associate Professor in the Radiation Oncology department at Medical College of WisconsinView Online
