Search

Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT)-based online adaptation is increasingly being introduced into many clinics. Upon implementation of a new treatment technique, a prospective risk analysis is required and enhances workflow safety. We conducted a risk analysis using Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) upon the introduction of an online adaptive treatment programme (Wegener et al., Z Med Phys. 2022). A prospective risk analysis, lacking in-depth clinical experience with a treatment modality or treatment machine, relies on imagination and estimates of the occurrence of different failure modes. Therefore, we systematically documented all irregularities during the first year of online adaptation, namely all cases in which quality assurance detected undesired states potentially leading to negative consequences. Additionally, the quality of automatic contouring was evaluated. Based on those quantitative data, the risk analysis was updated by an interprofessional team. Furthermore, a hypothetical radiation therapist-only workflow during adaptive sessions was included in the prospective analysis, as opposed to the involvement of an interprofessional team performing each adaptive treatment. A total of 126 irregularities were recorded during the first year. During that time period, many of the previously anticipated failure modes (almost) occurred, indicating that the initial prospective risk analysis captured relevant failure modes. However, some scenarios were not anticipated, emphasizing the limits of a prospective risk analysis. This underscores the need for regular updates to the risk analysis. The most critical failure modes are presented together with possible mitigation strategies. It was further noted that almost half of the reported irregularities applied to the non-adaptive treatments on this treatment machine, primarily due to a manual plan import step implemented in the institution's workflow., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interest or personal relationships that could have appeard to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier GmbH.. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The recently introduced Varian Ethos system allows adjusting radiotherapy treatment plans to anatomical changes on a daily basis. The system uses artificial intelligence to speed up the process of creating adapted plans, comes with its own software solutions and requires a substantially different workflow. A detailed analysis of possible risks of the associated workflow is presented., Methods: A prospective risk analysis of the adaptive workflow with the Ethos system was performed using Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA). An interprofessional team collected possible adverse events and evaluated their severity as well as their chance of occurrence and detectability. Measures to reduce the risks were discussed., Results: A total of 122 events were identified, and scored. Within the 20 events with the highest-ranked risks, the following were identified: Challenges due to the stand-alone software solution with very limited connectivity to the existing record and verify software and digital patient file, unfamiliarity with the new software and its limitations and the adaption process relying on results obtained by artificial intelligence. The risk analysis led to the implementation of additional quality assurance measures in the workflow., Conclusions: The thorough analysis of the risks associated with the new treatment technique was the basis for designing details of the workflow. The analysis also revealed challenges to be addressed by both, the vendor and customers. On the vendor side, this includes improving communication between their different software solutions. On the customer side, this especially includes establishing validation strategies to monitor the results of the black box adaption process making use of artificial intelligence., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier GmbH.. All rights reserved.)