Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T12:50:23.020Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The perception of radiation therapy students on a clinical specialist radiation therapist-led breast workshop

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 September 2013

Grace Lee ,
Kieng Tan  and
Robert Dinniwell
Grace Lee*
Affiliation:
Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, 610 University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5G2M9
Kieng Tan
Affiliation:
Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, 610 University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5G2M9 Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, 49 College Street, Suite 504, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5T1P5
Robert Dinniwell
Affiliation:
Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, 610 University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5G2M9 Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, 49 College Street, Suite 504, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5T1P5
*
Correspondence to: Grace Lee, Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, 610 University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5G2M9. Tel: 416 946 4501 EXT: 5499; Fax: 416 946 2177 E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Purpose

The clinical specialist radiation therapist (CSRT) is a radiation therapist with advanced site-specific clinical skills and knowledge that can be utilised to enhance the education of radiation therapy (RT) students within an academic setting. The aim of this study is to assess the students’ perception of the teaching provided by a CSRT within a case-based learning workshop tailored for breast cancer.

Methods

A workshop that followed the patient's RT treatment pathway (consultation, CT simulation, treatment planning and delivery) was led by a breast-site CSRT to 16 third-year students. Following completion of the workshop, a 4-point Likert-scale survey was distributed to explore the students’ didactic and clinical experiences and their general perceptions of the CSRT's contribution to their breast-site module education.

Results

The median didactic experience reported by the students were ‘a lot’ in patient care and ‘some’ in treatment unit and treatment planning. In contrast, the students reported less clinical experience; the median response for patient care and treatment unit experience was ‘a little’ and ‘none’ for treatment planning. All 13 students who responded to the survey agreed that the CSRT enhanced their understanding of the material. The students felt engaged in the CSRT-lecture and perceived it as value added. The majority of the students (92%) indicated the CSRT to be a useful learning resource in their training and education. Additional comments provided by the students noted the utility of the CSRT-led lecture in consolidating their knowledge of the breast cancer treatment planning and delivery and suggest further expansion of this learning format to other disease sites.

Conclusions

Third-year RT students commencing their clinical practicum will have had a greater proportion of their learning from didactic teaching as opposed to clinical experience. In transitioning to their final year, the focus of the curriculum shifts to the application of theory into the clinical environment. The students perceived the CSRT to be a useful resource to enhance their understanding of the breast-site module and their feedback supports the instructional quality and effectiveness of the CSRT in this clinical teaching role.

Keywords

Advanced practice radiation therapistclinical educationclinical specialist radiation therapistclinical teaching
Type
Original Articles
Information
Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice , Volume 13 , Issue 3 , September 2014 , pp. 277 - 283
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Harnett, N, Palmer, C, Bolderston, A, Wenz, J, Catton, P. The scholarly radiation therapist. Part one: charting the territory. J Radiother Pract 2008; 7: 99–104.Google Scholar
2.Bolderston, A, Harnett, N, Palmer, C, Wenz, J, Catton, P. The scholarly radiation therapist. Part two: developing an academic practice – the Princess Margaret Hospital experience. J Radiother Pract 2008; 7: 105–111.Google Scholar
3.Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care. Ministry Plans: Results-based Plan Briefing Book 2008–2009. Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care. http://www.health.gov.on.ca/en/common/ministry/publications/plans/rbp_2008_09.aspx. Accessed 14th August 2012.Google Scholar
4.HealthForceOntario. New Roles in Health Care. HealthForceOntario. http://www.healthforceontario.ca/WhatIsHFO/NewRoles.aspx. Accessed 1st October 2012.Google Scholar
5.Lee, G, Harnett, N, Zychla, L, Dinniwell, R E. Radiotherapy treatment review: a prospective evaluation of concordance between clinical specialist radiation therapist and radiation oncologist in patient assessments. J Med Imaging Radiat Sci 2012; 43: 6–10.Google Scholar
6.Lee, G, Fyles, A, Cho, B C Jet al. Evaluation of variability in seroma delineation between clinical specialist radiation therapist and radiation oncologist for adjuvant breast irradiation. Pract Radiat Oncol 2012; 2: 114–121.Google Scholar
7.Forsyth, L J, Maehle, V. Consultant radiographers: profile of the first generation. Radiography 2010; 16: 279–285.Google Scholar
8.Ford, P. The role of the consultant radiographer – experience of appointees. Radiography 2010; 16: 189–197.Google Scholar
9.Conway, A, Lewis, S, Robinson, J. Final-year diagnostic radiography students’ perception of role models within the profession. J Allied Health 2008; 37: 214–220.Google ScholarPubMed
10.Hutchinson, L. Educational environment. BMJ 2003; 326: 810–812.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11.Green, C. Classics in the History of Psychology: A Theory of Human Motivation (A.H. Maslow). http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Maslow/motivation.htm. August 2000. Accessed 14th August 2012.Google Scholar
12.Walker, J T P R N, Martin, T, White, Jet al. Generational (age) differences in nursing students’ preferences for teaching methods. J Nurs Educ 2006; 45: 371–374.Google Scholar
13.Clausing, S L, Kurtz, D L, Prendeville, J, Walt, J L. Generational diversity-the Nexters. AORN J 2003; 78: 373–379.Google Scholar
14.Johnson, S A, Romanello, M L. Generational diversity: teaching and learning approaches. Nurse Educ 2005; 30: 212–216.Google Scholar
15.Morrison, J. Where now for problem based learning? Lancet 2004; 363: 174–174.Google Scholar
16.Wood, D F. Problem based learning. BMJ 2003; 326: 328–330.Google Scholar