Clinical implementation of dynamic intensity-modulated radiotherapy: Radiographers' perspectives

British Journal of Radiology

Volumn 77, Issue 918, 2004, Pages 493-498

  McNair, H A ^a   Francis, G ^b   Balyckyi, J ^a  

^a INSTITUTE OF CANCER RESEARCH   (United Kingdom)

^b KINGSTON UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DATA ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN RELATION; INTENSITY MODULATED RADIATION THERAPY; INTERVIEW; JOB SATISFACTION; MALE; MEDICAL SPECIALIST; MOTIVATION; PHYSICIAN ATTITUDE; QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS; SKILL; STRESS; TRAINING; WORKLOAD;

ADULT; ALLIED HEALTH PERSONNEL; ATTITUDE OF HEALTH PERSONNEL; CLINICAL TRIALS, PHASE I; ENGLAND; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; PERCEPTION; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RADIOLOGY; RADIOTHERAPY, CONFORMAL; TECHNOLOGY, RADIOLOGIC;

EID: 3042639356     PISSN: 00071285     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1259/bjr/82394256     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Nutting C, Dearnaley DP. Intensity modulated radiation therapy: a clinical review. Br J Radiol 2000;73:459-69.
2. De Meerleer GO, Vakaet LAML, De Gersem WRT, De Wagter C, De Naeyer B, De Neve W. Radiotherapy of prostate cancer with or without intensity modulated beams: a planning comparison. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2000;47:639-48
3. Pirzkall A, Carol M, Lohr F, Hoss A, Wannenmacher M, Debus J. Comparison of intensity-modulated radiotherapy with conventional conformal radiotherapy for complex-shaped tumours. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2000;48: l71-80.
4. Zelefsky MJ, Fuks Z, Hunt M, et al. High dose intensity modulated radiation therapy for prostate cancer; early toxicity and biochemical outcome in 772 patients. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2002;53:1111-6.
5. Helyer SJ, Heisig S. Multileaf collimation versus conventional shielding blocks: time and motion study of beam shaping in radiotherapy. Radiother Oncol 1995;37:61-4.
6. IMRT Collaborative Working Group. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy: current status and issues of interest. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2001;51:880-914.
7. Blacker F, Brown C. Evaluation and the impact of information technologies on people in organizations. Human Relations 1985;38:213-31.
8. Mays N, Pope C. Qualitative research: rigour and qualitative research. Br Med J 1995;311:109-12.
9. Fitter M. The impact on new technology on nurses and patients. In: Payne R, Firth-Cozens J, editors. Stress in health professionals. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 1987: 211-29.
10. Pope C, Ziebland S, Mays N. Analysing qualitative data. Br Med J 2000;320:114-6.
11. Burnard P. Interpreting text: alternative to some current forms of textual analysis in qualitative research. Soc Sci Health 1995;1:236-45.
12. Ashworth P. Technology and machines - bad masters but good servants. Intensive Care Nurs 1987;3:1-2.
13. Carnevali DL. Nursing perspectives in health care technology. Nurs Admin Quart 1985;9:10-8.
14. Jennett B. Diagnosis-the technology of tests. In: Jennett B. High technology medicine: benefit or burden? Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986:53-74.
15. Glastein E. Intensity modulated radiation therapy: the inverse, the converse, and the perverse. Semin Radiat Oncol 2002;12:272-81.
16. Schultz R, Kagan R. On the role of intensity-modulated radiation therapy in radiation oncology. Med Phys 2002; 29:1473-81.
17. Zhen W, Thompson RB, Enke CA. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT): the radiation oncologist's perspective. Med Dosim 2002;27:155-9.
18. Rubin H, Rubin I. Listening, hearing and sharing social experiences In: Rubin H, Rubin I. Qualitative interviewing. The art of hearing. London: Sage 1995:1-16.
19. Wichowski HC. Professional uncertainty: nurses in the technologically intense arena. J Adv Nurs 1994;19:1162-7.
20. Locsin R. Machine technologies and caring in nursing. Image J Nurs Sch 1995;27:201-3.
21. McConnell E. The impact of machines on the work of the critical care nurse. Crit Care Nurs Quart 1990;12:45-52.
22. Rinard R. Technology, deskilling, and nurses: the impact of the technologically changing environment. Adv Nurs Sci 1996;18:60-9.
23. Silverman D. Theory in qualitative research. In: Silverman D. Doing qualitative research. A practical handbook. London: Sage, 2000:75-87.
24. Rogers EM. Innovativeness and adopter categories. In: Rogers EM. Diffusion of innovations. New York: The Free Press, 1995;252-80.