The Experts below are selected from a list of 7617 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
M. Mills - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
MO-DE-304-01: The Abt Study of Medical Physicist Work Values for Radiation Oncology Physics Services: Round IV
Medical Physics, 2015Co-Authors: M. MillsAbstract:The Abt study of Medical Physicist work values for radiation oncology physics services, Round IV is completed. It supersedes the Abt III study of 2008. The 2015 Abt study measured qualified Medical Physicist (QMP) work associated with routine radiation oncology procedures as well as some special procedures. As before, a work model was created to allow the Medical Physicist to defend QMP work based on both routine and special procedures service mix. The work model can be used to develop a cost justification report for setting charges for radiation oncology physics services. The Abt study Round IV was designed to empower the Medical Physicist to negotiate a service or employment contract with providers based on measured national QMP workforce and staffing data. For a variety of reasons, the diagnostic imaging contingent of AAPM has had a more difficult time trying estimate workforce requirements than their therapy counterparts. Over the past several years, the Diagnostic Work and Workforce Study Subcommittee (DWWSS) has collected survey data from AAPM members, but the data have been very difficult to interpret. The DWWSS has reached out to include more AAPM volunteers to create a more full and accurate representation of actual clinical practice models on the subcommittee. Though much work remains, through hours of discussion and brainstorming, the DWWSS has somewhat of a clear path forward. This talk will provide attendees with an update on the efforts of the subcommittee. Learning Objectives: 1. Understand the new information documented in the Abt studies. 2. Understand how to use the Abt studies to justify Medical Physicist staffing. 3. Learn relevant historical information on imaging Physicist workforce. 4. Understand the process of the DWWSS in 2014. 5. Understand the intended path forward for the DWWSS.
-
mo d i 618 01 estimating Medical Physicist fte using the 2003 abt survey and procedure volumes in radiation therapy
Medical Physics, 2005Co-Authors: Michael G Herman, M. Mills, Eric E Klein, A L BoyerAbstract:Purpose: To estimate radiation therapyMedical Physicist FTE needs based on procedure numbers and published Medical Physicist work survey data. Method and Materials: A spreadsheet was developed to combine procedure volumes requiring Medical Physicist effort with procedural time values extracted from the 2003 Abt survey and a previous survey on Medical physics costs (Herman et. al. JACMP, 2003) and included: Patient Procedures: Median procedural time efforts and annual volumes for CPT codes 77295, 77300–77370. Commissioning and QA: Annualized time for commissioning and QA per major clinical system. Education: Contact teaching time for Medical residents, allied health and Medical physics trainees with a preparation multiplier of 3 for didactic courses. Research: A 10% factor was used, recognizing that development work varies considerably between practices. Administration: A value between 10 and 15% was recommended by ACR. FTE needs were summarized for a 3 machine practice (800 new patients), IMRT (250 pts per year), HDR(50), Radiosurgery(60), prostate implants(40) and TBI(30). Physician residents and one Medical physics trainee are taught. Results: A total of 9.4 FTE was calculated based on: Patient Procedures — 6.67, Commissioning and QA − 1.04 Education: − 0.11, Research: − 0.78, Administration: − 0.78. With shared duties, no specials and an efficient electronic record, for example, the FTE could be reduced to 7.3 FTE. Conclusion: A Medical physics staffing complement of between 7.3 and 9.4 FTE is suggested by a model based on workloads from the 2003 Abt and procedure volumes in a clinic with 800 new patients. The range is due to the sharing of duties (with other professionals), efficiency and the absence of some procedures. The number of hours committed by the Medical Physicist for procedural effort versus non procedural effort must be evaluated/validated against one's specific practice to make proper use of data from the Abt.
Michael D Mills - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
analysis and practical use the abt study of Medical Physicist work values for radiation oncology physics services round ii
Journal of The American College of Radiology, 2005Co-Authors: Michael D MillsAbstract:Purpose The initial Abt Study of Medical Physicist Work Values for Radiation Oncology Physics Services was published in October 1995. That study measured qualified Medical Physicist (QMP) work associated only with routine radiation oncology procedures. In the intervening years, Medical physics practice has changed dramatically. Three-dimensional treatment planning, once considered a special procedure, is the standard of care for many patient presentations. Prostate seed brachytherapy, stereotactic procedures, and intensity-modulated radiation therapy now constitute a large portion of the time Medical Physicists devote to clinical duties. Special procedures now dominate radiation oncology, leading to the request for an updated work and staffing study for qualified Medical Physicists. Methods The updated Abt Study of Medical Physicist Work Values for Radiation Oncology Physics Services: Round II was published in June 2003. Round II measures and reports QMP work associated with both routine and most contemporary special procedures. Additionally, staffing patterns are reported for a variety of practice settings. Results A work model is created to allow Medical Physicists to defend QMP work on the basis of both routine and special procedures service mix. The work model can be used to develop a cost justification report for setting charges for radiation oncology physics services. The work and cost justification models may in turn be used to defend Medical Physicist staffing and compensation. Conclusion The updated Abt study empowers Medical Physicists to negotiate service or employment contracts with providers on the basis of measured national QMP work force and staffing data.
Stelios Christofides - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the european federation of organisations for Medical physics policy statement no 7 1 the roles responsibilities and status of the Medical Physicist including the criteria for the staffing levels in a Medical physics department approved by efomp counc
Physica Medica, 2016Co-Authors: Stephen Evans, Stelios Christofides, Marco BrambillaAbstract:This EFOMP Policy Statement is an amalgamation and an update of the EFOMP Policy Statements No. 2, 4 and 7. It presents guidelines for the roles, responsibilities and status of the Medical Physicist together with recommended minimum staffing levels. These recommendations take into account the ever-increasing demands for competence, patient safety, specialisation and cost effectiveness of modern healthcare services, the requirements of the European Union Council Directive 2013/59/Euratom laying down the basic safety standards for protection against the dangers arising from exposure to ionising radiation, the European Commission's Radiation Protection Report No. 174: "Guidelines on Medical physics expert", as well as the relevant publications of the International Atomic Energy Agency. The provided recommendations on minimum staffing levels are in very good agreement with those provided by both the European Commission and the International Atomic Energy Agency.
-
The European federation of organisations for Medical physics policy statement no. 15: Recommended guidelines on the role of the Medical Physicist within the hospital governance board
Physica Medica, 2015Co-Authors: Stelios Christofides, Peter SharpAbstract:This EFOMP Policy Statement presents an outline on hospital governance and encourages the participation of the Medical Physicist in the hospital governance. It also emphasises how essential it is for Medical Physicists to engage in their hospital's governing board's committees for the overall good of the patient.
-
Curriculum for education and training of Medical Physicists in nuclear medicine : recommendations from the EANM Physics Committee, the EANM Dosimetry Committee and EFOMP
Physica medica : PM : an international journal devoted to the applications of physics to medicine and biology : official journal of the Italian Associ, 2012Co-Authors: Alberto Del Guerra, Stelios Christofides, Manuel Bardiès, Nicola Belcari, Carmel J. Caruana, Paola Anna Erba, Cesare Gori, Michael Lassmann, Markus Nowak Lonsdale, B. SattlerAbstract:Abstract Purpose To provide a guideline curriculum covering theoretical and practical aspects of education and training for Medical Physicists in Nuclear Medicine within Europe. Material and methods National training programmes of Medical Physics, Radiation Physics and Nuclear Medicine physics from a range of European countries and from North America were reviewed and elements of best practice identified. An independent panel of experts was used to achieve consensus regarding the content of the curriculum. Results Guidelines have been developed for the specialist theoretical knowledge and practical experience required to practice as a Medical Physicist in Nuclear Medicine in Europe. It is assumed that the precondition for the beginning of the training is a good initial degree in Medical Physics at master level (or equivalent). The Learning Outcomes are categorised using the Knowledge, Skill and Competence approach along the lines recommended by the European Qualifications Framework. The minimum level expected in each topic in the theoretical knowledge and practical experience sections is intended to bring trainees up to the requirements expected of a Medical Physicist entering the field of Nuclear Medicine. Conclusions This new joint EANM/EFOMP European guideline curriculum is a further step to harmonise specialist training of Medical Physicists in Nuclear Medicine within Europe. It provides a common framework for national Medical Physics societies to develop or benchmark their own curricula. The responsibility for the implementation and accreditation of these standards and guidelines resides within national training and regulatory bodies.
-
The Education and training of clinical Medical Physicists in 25 European, 2 North American and 2 Australasian countries: Similarities and differences
Physica medica : PM : an international journal devoted to the applications of physics to medicine and biology : official journal of the Italian Associ, 2011Co-Authors: A.p. Stefanoyiannis, Stelios Christofides, K. Psichis, D. S. Geoghegan, I. Gerogiannis, W.h. Round, X. Geronikola-trapali, I. Armeniakos, P. A. Kaplanis, A. PrentakisAbstract:Abstract Purpose The clinical Medical Physicist is part of a team responsible for safe and competent provision of radiation-based diagnostic examinations and therapeutic practices. To ensure that the Physicist can provide an adequate service, sufficient education and training is indispensable. The aim of this study is to provide a structured description of the present status of the clinical Medical Physicist education and training framework in 25 European, 2 North American and 2 Australasian countries. Methods For this study, data collection was based on a questionnaire prepared by the European Federation of Organizations in Medical Physics (EFOMP) and filled-in either by the corresponding scientific societies-organizations or by the authors. Results In the majority of cases, a qualified Medical Physicist should have an MSc in Medical physics and 1–3 years of clinical experience. Education and training takes place in both universities and hospitals and the total duration of the programs ranges from 2.5 to 9 years. In 56% of all European countries, it is mandatory to hold a diploma or license to work as a Medical Physicist, the situation being similar in Australasian and 4 states of USA. Generally, there are national registers of Medical Physicists with inclusion on the register being voluntary. There are renewal mechanisms in the registers usually based on a Continuing Professional Development (CPD) system. Conclusions In conclusion, a common policy is followed in general, on topics concerning education and training as well as the practice of the Medical Physicist profession, notwithstanding the presence of a few differences.
-
Education and Training of the Medical Physicist in Europe
IFMBE Proceedings, 2009Co-Authors: Stelios Christofides, Wolfgang Schlegel, R. Padovani, Peter F. Sharp, A. Torresin, M. Wasilewska-radwanska, Wil Van Der Putten, E. Guibelalde, K. U. KaschAbstract:One of the main aims of the European Federation of Organisations for Medical Physics is to propose guidelines for education, training and accreditation programmes. This is achieved through the publication of Policy Statements and the organisation of education and training courses, seminars and conferences. It represents a long-term workprogramme aimed at harmonising the education and training of the Medical Physicist across Europe. This paper presents these efforts together with the challenges EFOMP needs to overcome in order to achieve these aims.
Germaine Heeren - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
guidelines for education and training of Medical Physicists in radiotherapy recommendations from an estro efomp working group
Radiotherapy and Oncology, 2004Co-Authors: T Eudaldo, Wolfgang Schlegel, H Huizenga, Inger Lena Lamm, Alan L Mckenzie, Franco Milano, D I Thwaites, Germaine HeerenAbstract:Purpose: To provide a guideline curriculum covering theoretical and practical aspects of education and training for Medical Physicists in radiotherapy within Europe. Material and methods: Guidelines have been developed for the specialist theoretical knowledge and practical experience required to practice as a Medical Physicist in radiotherapy. It is assumed that the typical entrant into training will have a good initial degree in the physical sciences, therefore these guidelines also require that and are additional to it. National training programmes of Medical physics, radiation physics and radiotherapy physics from a range of European countries and from North America were reviewed by an expert panel set up by the European Society of Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (ESTRO) and the European Federation of Organisations for Medical Physics (EFOMP). A draft document prepared by this group was circulated, via the EFOMP infrastructure, among national professional Medical physics societies in Europe for review and comment and was also discussed in an education session in the May 2003 EFOMP scientific meeting in Eindhoven. Results: The resulting guideline curriculum for education and training of Medical Physicists in radiotherapy within Europe discusses the EFOMP terms, qualified Medical Physicist (QMP) and specialist Medical Physicist (SMP), and the group's view of the links to the EU (Directive 97/43) term, Medical physics expert (MPE). The minimum level expected in each topic in the theoretical knowledge and practical experience sections is intended to bring trainees up to the requirements of a QMP. The responses from the circulation of the document to national societies and its discussion were either to agree its content, with no changes required, or to suggest changes, which were taken into account after consideration by the expert group. Following this the guidelines have been endorsed by the parent organisations. Conclusions: This new joint ESTRO/EFOMP European guideline curriculum is a first step to harmonise specialist training of Medical Physicists in radiotherapy within Europe. It provides a common framework for national Medical physics societies to develop or benchmark their own curricula, but is also flexible enough to suit different situations of initial physics qualifications, Medical physics training programmes, accreditation structures, etc. The responsibility for the implementation of these standards and guidelines will lie with the national training bodies and authorities. (C) 2004 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
-
Guidelines for education and training of Medical Physicists in radiotherapy: Recommendations from an ESTRO/EFOMP working group
Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology, 2004Co-Authors: T Eudaldo, Wolfgang Schlegel, H Huizenga, Inger Lena Lamm, Alan L Mckenzie, Franco Milano, D I Thwaites, Germaine HeerenAbstract:Purpose: To provide a guideline curriculum covering theoretical and practical aspects of education and training for Medical Physicists in radiotherapy within Europe. Material and methods: Guidelines have been developed for the specialist theoretical knowledge and practical experience required to practice as a Medical Physicist in radiotherapy. It is assumed that the typical entrant into training will have a good initial degree in the physical sciences, therefore these guidelines also require that and are additional to it. National training programmes of Medical physics, radiation physics and radiotherapy physics from a range of European countries and from North America were reviewed by an expert panel set up by the European Society of Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (ESTRO) and the European Federation of Organisations for Medical Physics (EFOMP). A draft document prepared by this group was circulated, via the EFOMP infrastructure, among national professional Medical physics societies in Europe for review and comment and was also discussed in an education session in the May 2003 EFOMP scientific meeting in Eindhoven. Results: The resulting guideline curriculum for education and training of Medical Physicists in radiotherapy within Europe discusses the EFOMP terms, qualified Medical Physicist (QMP) and specialist Medical Physicist (SMP), and the group's view of the links to the EU (Directive 97/43) term, Medical physics expert (MPE). The minimum level expected in each topic in the theoretical knowledge and practical experience sections is intended to bring trainees up to the requirements of a QMP. The responses from the circulation of the document to national societies and its discussion were either to agree its content, with no changes required, or to suggest changes, which were taken into account after consideration by the expert group. Following this the guidelines have been endorsed by the parent organisations. Conclusions: This new joint ESTRO/EFOMP European guideline curriculum is a first step to harmonise specialist training of Medical Physicists in radiotherapy within Europe. It provides a common framework for national Medical physics societies to develop or benchmark their own curricula, but is also flexible enough to suit different situations of initial physics qualifications, Medical physics training programmes, accreditation structures, etc. The responsibility for the implementation of these standards and guidelines will lie with the national training bodies and authorities. (C) 2004 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
Michael G Herman - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
aapm Medical physics practice guideline 7 a supervision of Medical Physicist assistants
Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics, 2020Co-Authors: Anthony J Seibert, Michael G Herman, Anthony P Blatnica, Jessica B Clements, Per H Halvorsen, Jennifer L Johnson, Beth A Schueler, Melissa C Martin, Jatinder Palta, Douglas E PfeifferAbstract:The American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) is a nonprofit professional society whose primary purposes are to advance the science, education and professional practice of Medical physics. The AAPM has more than 8,000 members and is the principal organization of Medical Physicists in the United States. The AAPM will periodically define new practice guidelines for Medical physics practice to help advance the science of Medical physics and to improve the quality of service to patients throughout the United States. Existing Medical physics practice guidelines will be reviewed for the purpose of revision or renewal, as appropriate, on their fifth anniversary or sooner. Each Medical physics practice guideline represents a policy statement by the AAPM, has undergone a thorough consensus process in which it has been subjected to extensive review, and requires the approval of the Professional Council. The Medical physics practice guidelines recognize that the safe and effective use of diagnostic and therapeutic radiology requires specific training, skills, and techniques, as described in each document. Reproduction or modification of the published practice guidelines and technical standards by those entities not providing these services is not authorized. The following terms are used in the AAPM practice guidelines: Must and Must Not: Used to indicate that adherence to the recommendation is considered necessary to conform to this practice guideline. Should and Should Not: Used to indicate a prudent practice to which exceptions may occasionally be made in appropriate circumstances. Approved by AAPM's Executive Committee May 28, 2019.
-
tu d brb 01 the road to training and practice of the Medical Physicist of the future
Medical Physics, 2007Co-Authors: J Masten, J Limmer, D Gilley, Michael G HermanAbstract:There are a number of changes pending that will impact the practice of Medical physics and those who are called “Medical Physicist.” Recent changes in the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) regulations have impacted the training and experience requirements for Medical Physicists to practice in programs licensed by the NRC and Agreement States. The pending CARE Act legislation in Congress will require that Providers utilize individuals, who meet Federal education and credentialing standards, to perform the technical components of Medical imaging and radiation therapy in order to participate in federal health programs such as Medicare, Medicaid and other programs administered by the Department of Health and Human Services. These minimum standards may be met by states requiring licensure. After 2012, the American Board of Radiology (ABR) goal for eligibility for certification will require graduation from a CAMPEP‐accredited Medical physics training program. All of these will impact how one qualifies to be a Medical Physicist and how they practice. This session will address these issues. Speakers: Jeffrey Masten, JD: Update and impact of the CARE Act. Jeffrey Limmer, MS Ed, MSc, DABR, — Past methods used to promote licensure in the existing states and the differences and similarities in these regulations. Debbie Gilley, — Review and Impact of Existing State Licensure and Differences in NRC and Agreement State Training and Experience Requirements. Mike Herman, Ph.D. — Future certification and credentialing in the post‐CARE ra and post‐2012 ABR (activities of MPRTP and TG133).
-
TU‐D‐BRB‐01: The Road to (Training and Practice Of) the Medical Physicist of the Future
Medical Physics, 2007Co-Authors: J Masten, J Limmer, D Gilley, Michael G HermanAbstract:There are a number of changes pending that will impact the practice of Medical physics and those who are called “Medical Physicist.” Recent changes in the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) regulations have impacted the training and experience requirements for Medical Physicists to practice in programs licensed by the NRC and Agreement States. The pending CARE Act legislation in Congress will require that Providers utilize individuals, who meet Federal education and credentialing standards, to perform the technical components of Medical imaging and radiation therapy in order to participate in federal health programs such as Medicare, Medicaid and other programs administered by the Department of Health and Human Services. These minimum standards may be met by states requiring licensure. After 2012, the American Board of Radiology (ABR) goal for eligibility for certification will require graduation from a CAMPEP‐accredited Medical physics training program. All of these will impact how one qualifies to be a Medical Physicist and how they practice. This session will address these issues. Speakers: Jeffrey Masten, JD: Update and impact of the CARE Act. Jeffrey Limmer, MS Ed, MSc, DABR, — Past methods used to promote licensure in the existing states and the differences and similarities in these regulations. Debbie Gilley, — Review and Impact of Existing State Licensure and Differences in NRC and Agreement State Training and Experience Requirements. Mike Herman, Ph.D. — Future certification and credentialing in the post‐CARE ra and post‐2012 ABR (activities of MPRTP and TG133).
-
mo d i 618 01 estimating Medical Physicist fte using the 2003 abt survey and procedure volumes in radiation therapy
Medical Physics, 2005Co-Authors: Michael G Herman, M. Mills, Eric E Klein, A L BoyerAbstract:Purpose: To estimate radiation therapyMedical Physicist FTE needs based on procedure numbers and published Medical Physicist work survey data. Method and Materials: A spreadsheet was developed to combine procedure volumes requiring Medical Physicist effort with procedural time values extracted from the 2003 Abt survey and a previous survey on Medical physics costs (Herman et. al. JACMP, 2003) and included: Patient Procedures: Median procedural time efforts and annual volumes for CPT codes 77295, 77300–77370. Commissioning and QA: Annualized time for commissioning and QA per major clinical system. Education: Contact teaching time for Medical residents, allied health and Medical physics trainees with a preparation multiplier of 3 for didactic courses. Research: A 10% factor was used, recognizing that development work varies considerably between practices. Administration: A value between 10 and 15% was recommended by ACR. FTE needs were summarized for a 3 machine practice (800 new patients), IMRT (250 pts per year), HDR(50), Radiosurgery(60), prostate implants(40) and TBI(30). Physician residents and one Medical physics trainee are taught. Results: A total of 9.4 FTE was calculated based on: Patient Procedures — 6.67, Commissioning and QA − 1.04 Education: − 0.11, Research: − 0.78, Administration: − 0.78. With shared duties, no specials and an efficient electronic record, for example, the FTE could be reduced to 7.3 FTE. Conclusion: A Medical physics staffing complement of between 7.3 and 9.4 FTE is suggested by a model based on workloads from the 2003 Abt and procedure volumes in a clinic with 800 new patients. The range is due to the sharing of duties (with other professionals), efficiency and the absence of some procedures. The number of hours committed by the Medical Physicist for procedural effort versus non procedural effort must be evaluated/validated against one's specific practice to make proper use of data from the Abt.