[en] Purpose: To determine the characteristics, needs, and concerns of the current radiation oncology workforce, evaluate best practices and opportunities for improving quality and safety, and assess what we can predict about the future workforce. Methods and Materials: An online survey was distributed to 35,204 respondents from all segments of the radiation oncology workforce, including radiation oncologists, residents, medical dosimetrists, radiation therapists, medical physicists, nurse practitioners, nurses, physician assistants, and practice managers/administrators. The survey was disseminated by the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) together with specialty societies representing other workforce segments. An overview of the methods and global results is presented in this paper. Results: A total of 6765 completed surveys were received, a response rate of 19%, and the final analysis included 5257 respondents. Three-quarters of the radiation oncologists, residents, and physicists who responded were male, in contrast to the other segments in which two-thirds or more were female. The majority of respondents (58%) indicated they were hospital-based, whereas 40% practiced in a free-standing/satellite clinic and 2% in another setting. Among the practices represented in the survey, 21.5% were academic, 25.2% were hospital, and 53.3% were private. A perceived oversupply of professionals relative to demand was reported by the physicist, dosimetrist, and radiation therapist segments. An undersupply was perceived by physician's assistants, nurse practitioners, and nurses. The supply of radiation oncologists and residents was considered balanced. Conclusions: This survey was unique as it attempted to comprehensively assess the radiation oncology workforce by directly surveying each segment. The results suggest there is potential to improve the diversity of the workforce and optimize the supply of the workforce segments. The survey also provides a benchmark for future studies, as many changes in the healthcare field exert pressure on the workforce

[en] Purpose: The American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) conducted the 2012 Radiation Oncology Workforce Survey to obtain an up-to-date picture of the workforce, assess its needs and concerns, and identify quality and safety improvement opportunities. The results pertaining to radiation oncologists (ROs) and residents (RORs) are presented here. Methods: The ASTRO Workforce Subcommittee, in collaboration with allied radiation oncology professional societies, conducted a survey study in early 2012. An online survey questionnaire was sent to all segments of the radiation oncology workforce. Respondents who were actively working were included in the analysis. This manuscript describes the data for ROs and RORs. Results: A total of 3618 ROs and 568 RORs were surveyed. The response rate for both groups was 29%, with 1047 RO and 165 ROR responses. Among ROs, the 2 most common racial groups were white (80%) and Asian (15%), and the male-to-female ratio was 2.85 (74% male). The median age of ROs was 51. ROs averaged 253.4 new patient consults in a year and 22.9 on-treatment patients. More than 86% of ROs reported being satisfied or very satisfied overall with their career. Close to half of ROs reported having burnout feelings. There was a trend toward more frequent burnout feelings with increasing numbers of new patient consults. ROs' top concerns were related to documentation, reimbursement, and patients' health insurance coverage. Ninety-five percent of ROs felt confident when implementing new technology. Fifty-one percent of ROs thought that the supply of ROs was balanced with demand, and 33% perceived an oversupply. Conclusions: This study provides a current snapshot of the 2012 radiation oncology physician workforce. There was a predominance of whites and men. Job satisfaction level was high. However a substantial fraction of ROs reported burnout feelings. Perceptions about supply and demand balance were mixed. ROs top concerns reflect areas of attention for the healthcare sector as a whole

[en] Purpose: Trimodality therapy (chemoradiation and surgery) is the standard of care for stage II/III rectal cancer but nearly one third of patients do not receive radiation therapy (RT). We examined the relationship between the density of radiation oncologists and the travel distance to receipt of RT. Methods and Materials: A retrospective study based on the National Cancer Data Base identified 26,845 patients aged 18 to 80 years with stage II/III rectal cancer diagnosed from 2007 to 2010. Radiation oncologists were identified through the Physician Compare dataset. Generalized estimating equations clustering by hospital service area was used to examine the association between geographic access and receipt of RT, controlling for patient sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. Results: Of the 26,845 patients, 70% received RT within 180 days of diagnosis or within 90 days of surgery. Compared with a travel distance of <12.5 miles, patients diagnosed at a reporting facility who traveled ≥50 miles had a decreased likelihood of receipt of RT (50-249 miles, adjusted odds ratio 0.75, P<.001; ≥250 miles, adjusted odds ratio 0.46; P=.002), all else being equal. The density level of radiation oncologists was not significantly associated with the receipt of RT. Patients who were female, nonwhite, and aged ≥50 years and had comorbidities were less likely to receive RT (P<.05). Patients who were uninsured but self-paid for their medical services, initially diagnosed elsewhere but treated at a reporting facility, and resided in Midwest had an increased the likelihood of receipt of RT (P<.05). Conclusions: An increased travel burden was associated with a decreased likelihood of receiving RT for patients with stage II/III rectal cancer, all else being equal; however, radiation oncologist density was not. Further research of geographic access and establishing transportation assistance programs or lodging services for patients with an unmet need might help decrease geographic barriers and improve the quality of rectal cancer care.