Search

Although auto-contouring methods were created to reduce the workload for the radiation oncology team, concern lies in whether auto-contouring can improve efficiency regarding generated contours of a treatment plan. Researchers have measured differences between auto-contouring algorithms and manual contour methods specific to the contouring of organs at risk (OAR). The problem lies in the paucity of literature specific to perceptions of auto-contouring and the impact on workflow efficiency. The purpose of this study was to measure medical dosimetrists' perceptions of how auto-contouring software impacts the treatment planning process. To measure perceptions, researchers surveyed medical dosimetrists about their perspectives on consistency and efficiency of auto-contouring during treatment planning. A (Qualtrics, Provo, UT) survey was created based on the 2 research questions in this study. The survey was distributed through email to 2598 full members of the American Association of Medical Dosimetrists (AAMD) who were certified by the MDCB; mostly medical dosimetrists but also included a small group of medical physicists. The email open rate was 39% (1024/2598) but the response rate for those who read the email was only 8.4% (86/1024). Of the survey respondents, 67% (59/86) used auto-contouring software; thus, eligible to complete the remainder of the survey. Majority of participants agreed that auto-contouring software decreases time spent contouring per patient; however, most agreed that manual contouring is more efficient. Therefore, it was inferred that a combination of both auto and manual contouring have an impact on workload efficiency. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]