ABSTRACT
Medical assistants (MAs) are allied health professionals who support a diverse range of functions in the clinical setting. Few certification requirements or continuing education opportunities exist for MAs;training specific for work in radiation oncology is particularly lacking. A interprofessional education program for MAs in radiation oncology was established in 2017. Here we report on the sustainability of the program and the aim of expansion. In previous work, we describe the development of a novel education program based on needs assessment of a single institution cohort of MAs in radiation oncology. The resulting 20-month curriculum was implemented primarily through resident-led didactics (2017-2020, Cycle 1). Program evaluation was performed through pre- and post-assessments. Following completion, the curriculum was updated to foster greater interprofessional education and was led by a mixture of medical residents, physics residents, nursing, nurse practitioners, therapists and additional radiation oncology staff (2020 - current, Cycle 2). Educators were nominated based on topic area expertise and interest. As previously reported, sessions in Cycle 1 were found to be consistently comprehensive (median Likert score, MLS 4-5) and informative (MLS 5) and the program showed increases in sense of empowerment (MLS change from 3.5 to 5) among the cohort (n=2-5 responses per session). Over the length of Cycle 1, there was sustained improvement in clinical knowledge within the scope of the MA role (MLS 5) and empathy for patients (MLS 5) and stably high rating of job satisfaction (Likert Scale range 4-5). Cycle 2 is currently in progress with results forthcoming. Notably, the program was stably expanded from n=5-7 to n=7-8 MAs in Cycles 1 and 2 respectively. Program participation was challenged by COVID-19 staffing shortages however demonstrated sustained interest and participation (range 2-6 participants per topic). Cycle 1 included 4 (20%) interprofessional educators whereas Cycle 2 included 11 (55%). Here we report on a 20-month interprofessional education program for MAs in radiation oncology which demonstrated improvement in empowerment, clinical knowledge, and high job satisfaction. The program is found to be implemented longitudinally with expansion in both educators and participants. Incorporation of interprofessional educators has improved leadership and educational opportunities and increased program sustainability. Future directions of the program include expansion to a multi-institutional setting for Cycle 3, to begin July 2022. Increased cohort size may allow for further understanding of the impact of MA education on clinical workflow, interprofessional collaboration, and patient care. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics is the property of Pergamon Press - An Imprint of Elsevier Science and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Radiation Oncology Education Collaborative Study Group (ROECSG) hosted its annual international symposium using a virtual format in May 2020. This report details the experience of hosting a virtual meeting and presents attendee feedback on the platform. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The ROECSG symposium was hosted virtually on May 15, 2020. A postsymposium survey was distributed electronically to assess attendee demographics, participation, and experience. Attendee preference and experience were queried using 3-point and 5-point Likert-type scales, respectively. Symplur LLC was used to generate analytics for the conference hashtag (#ROECSG). RESULTS: The survey was distributed to all 286 registrants, with a response rate of 67% (191 responses). Seventeen nonattendee responses were omitted from this analysis, for a total of 174 included respondents. Eighty-two attendees (47%) were present for the entire symposium. A preference for a virtual symposium was expressed by 78 respondents (45%), whereas 44 (25%) had no preference and 52 (30%) preferred an in-person meeting. A total of 150 respondents (86%) rated the symposium as "extremely" well organized. Respondents who had not attended a prior in-person ROECSG symposium were more likely to prefer the virtual format (P = .03). Seventy-eight respondents (45%) reported a preference for the virtual platform for reviewing scholarly work, and 103 (59%) reported a preference for an in-person platform for networking. On the day of the symposium, #ROECSG had 408 tweets and 432,504 impressions. CONCLUSIONS: The 2020 ROECSG symposium was well received and can serve as a framework for future virtual meetings. Although the virtual setting may facilitate sharing research, networking aspects are more limited. Effort is needed to develop hybrid virtual and in-person meetings that meet the needs of participants in both settings. Social media is a significant avenue for dissemination and discussion of information and may be valuable in the virtual setting.