Failure modes and effects analysis of total skin electron irradiation technique

Implementing total skin electron irradiation in radiotherapy: a structured change management approach

BACKGROUND

Total skin electron irradiation (TSEI) is a specialized radiotherapy technique used to treat cutaneous T‑cell lymphoma, including mycosis fungoides and Sézary syndrome. Despite its clinical benefits, TSEI is rarely implemented in clinical practice due to significant technical and organizational challenges. This study explores a structured approach to integrating TSEI into clinical routines by applying a comprehensive change management framework in a German radiotherapy department.

METHODS

The implementation process was based on Kotter's eight-step change management model and carried out from 2022 to 2024 by a multidisciplinary team. Key steps included creating a sense of urgency, forming a guiding coalition, developing and communicating a clear vision, and pilot testing to generate short-term successes. A dynamic stakeholder analysis was conducted to continuously identify and manage factors that could promote or hinder the change.

RESULTS

The structured approach facilitated integration of TSEI into routine practice. The project enabled comprehensive staff training, adaptation of technical workflows, and development of necessary protocols and equipment. Key milestones were achieved, including initial patient treatments and positive staff feedback, demonstrating the method's feasibility and acceptance. The stakeholder analysis was instrumental in reducing apprehensions and maintaining alignment among team members.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that a structured change management approach is effective in integrating complex techniques like TSEI into clinical practice. The findings highlight that a systematic framework can help to overcome organizational and technical challenges, thereby enhancing patient care and operational efficiency. Future efforts should continue to employ structured methodologies for the sustainable integration of new medical technologies.

Patient Positioning and Treatment Techniques in Total Skin Irradiation: A Scoping Review

Introduction: Total skin irradiation (TSI) is a radiotherapy technique used to treat cutaneous lymphomas, such as mycosis fungoides. A key aspect of the success of the treatment is the correct positioning of the patient, which ensures a homogeneous distribution of radiation over the skin surface, minimizing exposure to the surrounding healthy tissues. Materials and Methods: Following the preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis (PRISMA) extension for scoping reviews and the Arksey and O'Malley framework, electronic searches of EMBASE, PubMed, SCOPUS, and the Web of Science were conducted to identify original studies detailing positioning techniques for TSI in clinical practice. Results: A total of 44 studies were included, reporting a range of positioning techniques used in TSI. The selected articles were divided into four categories: Stanford, rotational, tomotherapy, and mixed (including studies comparing two or more of the previously mentioned techniques). Articles concerning the Stanford technique were predominant (n = 33; 75.0%), followed by those addressing the rotational technique (n = 5; 11.4%), tomotherapy (n = 3; 6.8%), and mixed (n = 3; 6.8%). Studies on the Stanford technique described both the original method and its modifications, including variations such as the lying position, and analyzed its strengths and limitations. Research on the rotational method examined different device configurations and implementation strategies to optimize dose distribution and treatment efficiency. Mixed articles compared the Stanford and rotational techniques, highlighting their similar dose uniformity while examining differences in treatment efficiency and practical implementation. Conclusions: Despite its widespread use, the Stanford technique is associated with challenges that have led to the exploration of alternative positioning strategies. The rotational technique addresses some of these limitations, while tomotherapy offers advanced immobilization but raises toxicity concerns. Future research should focus on optimizing the balance between efficacy, safety, and practicality of treatment in clinical settings.

Process mapping with failure mode and effects analysis to identify determinants of implementation in healthcare settings: a guide

BACKGROUND

Generating and analyzing process maps can help identify and prioritize barriers to the implementation of evidence-based practices in healthcare settings. Guidance on how to systematically apply and report these methods in implementation research is scant. We describe a method combining a qualitative approach to developing process maps with a quantitative evaluation of maps drawn from the quality improvement literature called failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA).

METHODS

We provide an outline and guidance for how investigators can use process mapping with FMEA to identify and prioritize barriers when implementing evidence-based clinical interventions. Suggestions for methods and reporting were generated based on established procedures for process mapping with FMEA and through review of original research papers which apply both methods in healthcare settings. We provide case examples to illustrate how this approach can be operationalized in implementation research.

RESULTS

The methodology of process mapping with FMEA can be divided into four broad phases: 1) formulating a plan, 2) generating process maps to identify and organize barriers over time, 3) prioritizing barriers through FMEA, and 4) devising an implementation strategy to address priority barriers. We identified 14 steps across the four phases. Two illustrative examples are provided. Case 1 describes the implementation of referrals to chiropractic care for adults with low back pain in primary care clinics. Case 2 describes the implementation of a family navigation intervention for children with autism spectrum disorder seeking care in pediatric clinics. For provisional guidance for reporting, we propose the REporting Process mapping and Analysis for Implementation Research (REPAIR) checklist.

CONCLUSIONS

Process mapping with FMEA can elucidate barriers and facilitators to successful implementation of evidence-based clinical interventions. This paper provides initial guidance for more systematic applications of this methodology in implementation research. Future research should use a consensus-building approach, such as a multidisciplinary Delphi panel, to further delineate the reporting standards for studies that use process mapping with FMEA.

Process failure mode and effects analysis for external beam radiotherapy: Introducing a literature-based template and a novel action priority

PURPOSE

The first aim of the study was to create a general template for analyzing potential failures in external beam radiotherapy, EBRT, using the process failure mode and effects analysis (PFMEA). The second aim was to modify the action priority (AP), a novel prioritization method originally introduced by the Automotive Industry Action Group (AIAG), to work with different severity, occurrence, and detection rating systems used in radiation oncology.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The AIAG PFMEA approach was employed in combination with an extensive literature survey to develop the EBRT-PFMEA template. Subsets of high-risk failure modes found through the literature survey were added to the template where applicable. Our modified AP for radiation oncology (RO AP) was defined using a weighted sum of severity, occurrence, and detectability. Then, Monte Carlo simulations were conducted to compare the original AIAG AP, the RO AP, and the risk priority number (RPN). The results of the simulations were used to determine the number of additional corrective actions per failure mode and to parametrize the RO AP to our department's rating system.

RESULTS

An EBRT-PFMEA template comprising 75 high-risk failure modes could be compiled. The AIAG AP required 1.7 additional corrective actions per failure mode, while the RO AP ranged from 1.3 to 3.5, and the RPN required 3.6. The RO AP could be parametrized so that it suited our rating system and evaluated severity, occurrence, and detection ratings equally to the AIAG AP.

CONCLUSIONS

An adjustable EBRT-PFMEA template is provided which can be used as a practical starting point for creating institution-specific templates. Moreover, the RO AP introduces transparent action levels that can be adapted to any rating system.

Dosimetry, Optimization and FMEA of Total Skin Electron Irradiation (TSEI)

PURPOSE

Total Skin Electron Irradiation (TSEI) is a method for treating malignant cutaneous T-cell lymphomas. This work aims to implement and optimize the total skin technique established at Strahlenklinik Erlangen, Germany on two new linear accelerators and to quantify the risks using failure mode and effects (FMEA) analysis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

TSEI is performed at a VersaHD accelerator (Elekta, Stockholm) with 6MeV in the "high dose rate mode" HDRE and a nominal field size of 40×40cm2. To reach the entire skin surface, the patients perform 6 different body positions at a distance of 330cm behind an acrylic scatter plate, with two overlapping irradiation fields being radiated at 2 gantry angles per position. The irradiation technique was commissioned according to the recommendation of AAPM report 23. With the help of a reference profile at 270°, 2 gantry angles were calculated, which in total resulted in an optimal dose distribution. This was metrologically verified with ion-chamber measurements in the patient's longitudinal axis. The influence of the shape of the acrylic scatter plate and the distance between the acrylic scatter plate and patient was determined by measurements. The dose homogeneity was verified using an anthropomorphic disc phantom equipped with GafChromic films. The workflows and failure modes of the total skin technique were described in a process map and subsequently quantified with a FMEA analysis.

RESULTS

An optimal dose distribution is achieved at a distance of SSD=330cm, using the gantry angles 289° and 251°. The previously used segmented acrylic scatter plate was replaced by a flat plate (200×120×0.5cm3), which is placed at a distance of 50cm in front of the patient. The densitometric evaluation of the GafChromic films in the anthropomorphic disc phantom revealed an expected dose distribution of 3Gy at a depth of up to 1.5cm below the skin surface, with a homogeneity of ±10% over the phantom's longitudinal axis. By FMEA a maximum risk priority number of 30 was determined.

CONCLUSION

Based on the calculations and measurements performed on the new accelerators as well as the risk analysis, we concluded that total skin therapy can be implemented clinically.

A bi-institutional multi-disciplinary failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) for a Co-60 based total body irradiation technique

BACKGROUND

We aim to assess the risks associated with total body irradiation (TBI) delivered using a commercial dedicated Co-60 irradiator, and to evaluate inter-institutional and inter-professional variations in the estimation of these risks.

METHODS

A failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) was generated using guidance from the AAPM TG-100 report for quantitative estimation of prospective risk metrics. Thirteen radiation oncology professionals from two institutions rated possible failure modes (FMs) for occurrence (O), severity (S), and detectability (D) indices to generate a risk priority number (RPN). The FMs were ranked by descending RPN value. Absolute gross differences (AGD) in resulting RPN values and Jaccard Index (JI; for the top 20 FMs) were calculated. The results were compared between professions and institutions.

RESULTS

A total of 87 potential FMs (57, 15, 10, 3, and 2 for treatment, quality assurance, planning, simulation, and logistics respectively) were identified and ranked, with individual RPN ranging between 1-420 and mean RPN values ranging between 6 and 74. The two institutions shared 6 of their respective top 20 FMs. For various institutional and professional comparison pairs, the number of common FMs in the top 20 FMs ranged from 6 to 13, with JI values of 18-48%. For the top 20 FMs, the trend in inter-professional variability was institution-specific. The mean AGD values ranged between 12.5 and 74.5 for various comparison pairs. AGD values differed the most for medical physicists (MPs) in comparison to other specialties i.e. radiation oncologists (ROs) and radiation therapists (RTs) [MPs-vs-ROs: 36.3 (standard deviation SD = 34.1); MPs-vs-RTs: 41.2 (SD = 37.9); ROs-vs-RTs: 12.5 (SD = 10.8)]. Trends in inter-professional AGD values were similar for both institutions.

CONCLUSION

This inter-institutional comparison provides prospective risk analysis for a new treatment delivery unit and illustrates the institution-specific nature of FM prioritization, primarily due to operational differences. Despite being subjective in nature, the FMEA is a valuable tool to ensure the identification of the most significant risks, particularly when implementing a novel treatment modality. The creation of a bi-institutional, multidisciplinary FMEA for this unique TBI technique has not only helped identify potential risks but also served as an opportunity to evaluate clinical and safety practices from the perspective of both multiple professional roles and different institutions.

Planning and delivery of intensity modulated bolus electron conformal therapy

PURPOSE

Bolus electron conformal therapy (BECT) is a clinically useful, well-documented, and available technology. The addition of intensity modulation (IM) to BECT reduces volumes of high dose and dose spread in the planning target volume (PTV). This paper demonstrates new techniques for a process that should be suitable for planning and delivering IM-BECT using passive radiotherapy intensity modulation for electrons (PRIME) devices.

METHODS

The IM-BECT planning and delivery process is an addition to the BECT process that includes intensity modulator design, fabrication, and quality assurance. The intensity modulator (PRIME device) is a hexagonal matrix of small island blocks (tungsten pins of varying diameter) placed inside the patient beam-defining collimator (cutout). Its design process determines a desirable intensity-modulated electron beam during the planning process, then determines the island block configuration to deliver that intensity distribution (segmentation). The intensity modulator is fabricated and quality assurance performed at the factory (.decimal, LLC, Sanford, FL). Clinical quality assurance consists of measuring a fluence distribution in a plane perpendicular to the beam in a water or water-equivalent phantom. This IM-BECT process is described and demonstrated for two sites, postmastectomy chest wall and temple. Dose plans, intensity distributions, fabricated intensity modulators, and quality assurance results are presented.

RESULTS

IM-BECT plans showed improved D90-10 over BECT plans, 6.4% versus 7.3% and 8.4% versus 11.0% for the postmastectomy chest wall and temple, respectively. Their intensity modulators utilized 61 (single diameter) and 246 (five diameters) tungsten pins, respectively. Dose comparisons for clinical quality assurance showed that for doses greater than 10%, measured agreed with calculated dose within 3% or 0.3 cm distance-to-agreement (DTA) for 99.9% and 100% of points, respectively.

CONCLUSION

These results demonstrated the feasibility of translating IM-BECT to the clinic using the techniques presented for treatment planning, intensity modulator design and fabrication, and quality assurance processes.

Process mapping in healthcare: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Process mapping (PM) supports better understanding of complex systems and adaptation of improvement interventions to their local context. However, there is little research on its use in healthcare. This study (i) proposes a conceptual framework outlining quality criteria to guide the effective implementation, evaluation and reporting of PM in healthcare; (ii) reviews published PM cases to identify context and quality of PM application, and the reported benefits of using PM in healthcare.

METHODS

We developed the conceptual framework by reviewing methodological guidance on PM and empirical literature on its use in healthcare improvement interventions. We conducted a systematic review of empirical literature using PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) methodology. Inclusion criteria were: full text empirical study; describing the process through which PM has been applied in a healthcare setting; published in English. Databases searched are: Medline, Embase, HMIC-Health Management Information Consortium, CINAHL-Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Scopus. Two independent reviewers extracted and analysed data. Each manuscript underwent line by line coding. The conceptual framework was used to evaluate adherence of empirical studies to the identified PM quality criteria. Context in which PM is used and benefits of using PM were coded using an inductive thematic analysis approach.

RESULTS

The framework outlines quality criteria for each PM phase: (i) preparation, planning and process identification, (ii) data and information gathering, (iii) process map generation, (iv) analysis, (v) taking it forward. PM is used in a variety of settings and approaches to improvement. None of the reviewed studies (N = 105) met all ten quality criteria; 7% were compliant with 8/10 or 9/10 criteria. 45% of studies reported that PM was generated through multi-professional meetings and 15% reported patient involvement. Studies highlighted the value of PM in navigating the complexity characterising healthcare improvement interventions.

CONCLUSION

The full potential of PM is inhibited by variance in reporting and poor adherence to underpinning principles. Greater rigour in the application of the method is required. We encourage the use and further development of the proposed framework to support training, application and reporting of PM.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Prospero ID: CRD42017082140.

Failure mode and effects analysis for proactive healthcare risk evaluation: A systematic literature review

RATIONALE, AIMS, AND OBJECTIVES

Failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) is a valuable reliability management tool that can preemptively identify the potential failures of a system and assess their causes and effects, thereby preventing them from occurring. The use of FMEA in the healthcare setting has become increasingly popular over the last decade, being applied to a multitude of different areas. The objective of this study is to review comprehensively the literature regarding the application of FMEA for healthcare risk analysis.

METHODS

An extensive search was carried out in the scholarly databases of Scopus and PubMed, and we only chose the academic articles which used the FMEA technique to solve healthcare risk analysis problems. Furthermore, a bibliometric analysis was performed based on the number of citations, publication year, appeared journals, authors, and country of origin.

RESULTS

A total of 158 journal papers published over the period of 1998 to 2018 were extracted and reviewed. These publications were classified into four categories (ie, healthcare process, hospital management, hospital informatization, and medical equipment and production) according to the healthcare issues to be solved, and analyzed regarding the application fields and the utilized FMEA methods.

CONCLUSION

FMEA has high practicality for healthcare quality improvement and error reduction and has been prevalently employed to improve healthcare processes in hospitals. This research supports academics and practitioners in effectively adopting the FMEA tool to proactively reduce healthcare risks and increase patient safety, and provides an insight into its state-of-the-art.

A failure modes and effects analysis quality management framework for image-guided small animal irradiators: A change in paradigm for radiation biology

PURPOSE

Image-guided small animal irradiators (IGSAI) are increasingly being adopted in radiation biology research. These animal irradiators, designed to deliver radiation with submillimeter accuracy, exhibit complexity similar to that of clinical radiation delivery systems, including image guidance, robotic stage motion, and treatment planning systems. However, physics expertise and resources are scarcer in radiation biology, which makes implementation of conventional prescriptive QA infeasible. In this study, we apply the failure modes and effect analysis (FMEA) popularized by the AAPM task group 100 (TG-100) report to IGSAI and radiation biological research.

METHODS

Radiation biological research requires a change in paradigm where small errors to large populations of animals are more severe than grievous errors that only affect individuals. To this end, we created a new adverse effects severity table adapted to radiation biology research based on the original AAPM TG-100 severity table. We also produced a process tree which outlines the main components of radiation biology studies performed on an IGSAI, adapted from the original clinical IMRT process tree from TG-100. Using this process tree, we created and distributed a preliminary survey to eight expert IGSAI operators in four institutions. Operators rated proposed failure modes for occurrence, severity, and lack of detectability, and were invited to share their own experienced failure modes. Risk probability numbers (RPN) were calculated and used to identify the failure modes which most urgently require intervention.

RESULTS

Surveyed operators indicated a number of high (RPN >125) failure modes specific to small animal irradiators. Errors due to equipment breakdown, such as loss of anesthesia or thermal control, received relatively low RPN (12-48) while errors related to the delivery of radiation dose received relatively high RPN (72-360). Errors identified could either be improved by manufacturer intervention (e.g., electronic interlocks for filter/collimator) or physics oversight (errors related to tube calibration or treatment planning system commissioning). Operators identified a number of failure modes including collision between the collimator and the stage, misalignment between imaging and treatment isocenter, inaccurate robotic stage homing/translation, and incorrect SSD applied to hand calculations. These were all relatively highly rated (90-192), indicating a possible bias in operators towards reporting high RPN failure modes.

CONCLUSIONS

The first FMEA specific to radiation biology research was applied to image-guided small animal irradiators following the TG-100 methodology. A new adverse effects severity table and a process tree recognizing the need for a new paradigm were produced, which will be of great use to future investigators wishing to pursue FMEA in radiation biology research. Future work will focus on expanding scope of user surveys to users of all commercial IGSAI and collaborating with manufacturers to increase the breadth of surveyed expert operators.