Overcoming Burnout and Promoting Wellness in Radiation Oncology: A Report From the ACR Commission on Radiation Oncology.

Burnout, defined by the presence of emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and decreased sense of personal accomplishment, impacts a significant portion of radiation oncologists. This has been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic, is notably worse for women, and has been identified as an international concern. Key contributors to burnout within radiation oncology include inadequate clinical and administrative support, imbalanced personal and professional lives including time with family and for self-care, decreased job satisfaction secondary to increased electronic medical record and decreased patient time, unsupportive organizational culture, lack of transparency from leadership and inclusion in administrative decisions, emotionally intensive patient interactions, challenges within the radiation oncology workforce, financial security related to productivity-based compensation and increasing medical training-related debt, limited education on wellness, and fear of seeking mental health services due to stigma and potential negative impacts on the trajectory of one's career. Limited data exist to quantify the impacts of these factors on the overall levels of burnout within radiation oncology specifically, and additional efforts are needed to understand and address root causes of burnout within the field. Strategies should focus on improving the systems in which physicians work and providing the necessary skills and resources to thrive in high-stress, high-stakes work environments.

A national survey of HDR source knowledge among practicing radiation oncologists and residents: Establishing a willingness-to-pay threshold for cobalt-60 usage.

PURPOSE: Ir-192 is the predominant source for high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy in United States markets. Co-60, with longer half-life and fewer source exchanges, has piloted abroad with comparable clinical dosimetry but increased shielding requirements. We sought to identify practitioner knowledge of Co-60 and establish acceptable willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds for additional shielding requirements for use in future cost-benefit analysis. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A nationwide survey of U.S. radiation oncologists was conducted from June to July 2015, assessing knowledge of HDR sources, brachytherapy unit shielding, and factors that may influence source-selection decision-making. Self-identified decision makers in radiotherapy equipment purchase and acquisition were asked their WTP on shielding should a more cost-effective source become available. RESULTS: Four hundred forty surveys were completed and included. Forty-four percent were ABS members. Twenty percent of respondents identified Co-60 as an HDR source. Respondents who identified Co-60 were significantly more likely to be ABS members, have attended a national brachytherapy conference, and be involved in brachytherapy selection. Sixty-six percent of self-identified decision makers stated that their facility would switch to a more cost-effective source than Ir-192, if available. Cost and experience were the most common reasons provided for not switching. The most common WTP value selected by respondents was <$25,000. CONCLUSIONS: A majority of respondents were unaware of Co-60 as a commercially available HDR source. This investigation was novel in directly assessing decision makers to establish WTP for shielding costs that source change to Co-60 may require. These results will be used to establish WTP threshold for future cost-benefit analysis.