The role of licensed nursing personnel in radiation oncology part B: integrating the ambulatory care nursing conceptual framework

Pilot Curriculum for Continued Professional Development of Radiation Oncology Nurses

Purpose

Limited structured educational programs are available for the continued professional development of radiation oncology nurses. In this study, we evaluated a pilot curriculum focusing on clinical workflow and toxicity management for radiation oncology nurses at a single university-affiliated medical center network.

Methods and Materials

Based on a previous multi-institutional needs assessment, a targeted curriculum on clinical workflow and toxicity management was developed, including didactic lectures, written disease-specific toxicity management guidelines, and standardized medication/laboratory order preference lists in the electronic health record. An anonymized survey was circulated to all participants pre- and postcurriculum. The survey was composed of Likert-type subjective questions and 11 objective knowledge-based questions (KBQs). Paired Likert-type data were analyzed using Wilcoxon signed ranks test. Objective question data were compared with the McNamar's mid P test.

Results

Thirteen nurses participated in the pilot curriculum and 100% completed pre- and post curriculum surveys. After the didactics, nurses reported a significant increase in their understanding of the responsibilities of a nurse and overall process of care and their ability to explain computed tomography simulation, as well as their ability to assess, manage, and grade radiation-related toxicities (P < .01). There was significant improvement in the percent of correct answers on objective KBQs from a baseline of 52% to 80% after the curriculum (P < .01). Qualitatively, 70% (9/13) of nurses rated the curriculum as "extremely useful" and 30% (4/13) as "quite useful."

Conclusions

Our pilot curriculum using a combination of in-person formal didactics, toxicity management guidelines, and electronic health record based order preference lists was well-received and showed promising results on KBQ assessment. This work may be used to guide the development of larger curricula for nurse onboarding and continuing education in a multicenter setting.

Assessment of Radiation Oncology Nurse Education in the United States

PURPOSE

Nurses in the radiation oncology (RO) clinic have a critical role in the management of patients receiving radiation therapy. However, limited data exist regarding the exposure of nurses to RO during training and the current educational needs of practicing RO nurses. This study assesses nurses' prior RO education, participation in national training efforts, and perceived educational needs.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A web-based survey using a 5-point Likert-type scale was distributed to RO nurses at 3 academic medical centers. Questions focused on prior education experiences, clinical areas of strength/weakness, and perceived value of future educational interventions. Likert-type scores are reported as median (interquartile range), and a Kruskal-Wallis test was conducted to assess for significant differences in responses.

RESULTS

The survey response rate was 39 of 54 (72%). Respondents were 90% female and trained at 30 nursing schools in 17 states. Only 5% of nurses reported a curriculum in nursing school with RO content, and nearly all (97%) received their RO education on the job. Forty-one percent of nurses completed the Oncology Nursing Society radiation therapy certificate course, and only 5% completed the American Society for Radiation Oncology nursing module. Nurses felt most confident in the overall management of patients with breast (4 [3-4]), prostate (4 [3-5]), and central nervous system (4 [3-4]) cancers and least confident for lymphoma (3 [2-4]), gynecologic (3 [2-4]), and head and neck cancers (3 [2-4]; P < .01). Nurses rated didactic lectures from physicians (5 [3-5]), shadowing RO residents (4 [3-5]), and working with simulation therapists (4 [3-5]) as valuable components to include in a training curriculum (P = .08).

CONCLUSIONS

Nursing school exposure to RO is limited, and only a minority of RO nurses complete RO-specific training or certification available from national organizations. This study identifies several areas of perceived clinical nursing strengths and weaknesses that can be used to inform the design of future RO nursing educational programs.

To be involved or not: factors that influence nurses' involvement in providing treatment decisional support in advanced cancer

Decisional support is a multifaceted process of facilitating patients' decision making regarding treatment choices. Effective decisional support practices of nurses in relation to the use of anticancer therapies in patients with advanced disease are central to quality cancer care. A recent qualitative descriptive study (n=21) exploring the decision making practices of doctors and nurses in one tertiary cancer centre in New Zealand identified many complexities associated with nurses and their participation in decisional support. The study revealed that cancer nurses had varied opinions about the meaning and importance of their roles in treatment related decision making. This variation was significant and led the researchers to undertake a detailed secondary exploration of factors that impacted on the nurses' involvement in the provision of decisional support. Four key groups of factors were identified. These were factors relating to degree of knowledge, level of experience, beliefs and understandings about nursing roles and cancer therapies, and structural interfaces in the work setting. Understanding these factors is important because it allows modification of the conditions which impact on the ability to provide effective decisional care. It also provides some understanding of clinical drivers associated with nurses' decisional support work with patients who have advanced cancer.