S1332
Interdisciplinary - Education in radiation oncology
ESTRO 206
Quantitatively evaluating a Virtual Environment for Radiotherapy Training (VERT) involved experience for 4th year Medical Students Chris Corcoran 1 , Kerrie-Anne Calder 1 , Mike Kirby 1,2 1 School of Allied Health Professions and Nursing, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom. 2 School of Medical Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom Purpose/Objective: Within healthcare professions pre-registration training, clinical simulation usage still grows. For Radiotherapy, many use the VERT platform for its immersive and interactive learning, bringing capabilities not possible on clinical placement (e.g. viewing patients’ internal anatomy on the treatment couch, from 3D/4D CT, MR and PET imaging). At our university, VERT is used for radiation therapy students, but also now for fourth year Medical students prior to oncology placements. Here we present an initial quantitative evaluation of such sessions. Material/Methods: Following full University ethical approval, an anonymised, voluntary mixed-methods approach was used, through pre and post-session questionnaires. The hour-long session included (a) a brief introductory presentation on Radiotherapy and Oncology; (b) demonstrating typical immobilisation equipment and procedures and (c) a VERT demonstration of image- guided radiotherapy. Likert-styled questions were used to assess knowledge and understanding; open- ended questions for qualitative, experiential assessment. Typical questions included describing levels of knowledge of Radiotherapy and its role in cancer management; the role of immobilisation; need for accurate radiotherapy; understanding Radiotherapy processes and image-guidance etc.. Answers were scored from ‘poor’ (score of 1) to ‘excellent’ (5) or strongly disagree’ (1) to strongly agree (5). Descriptive statistics and T-tests were used for initial analysis. Results: Sample cumulative results from the 24 participants are shared here – i.e. summing ‘very good+excellent’ scores [VGEX] or ‘agree+strongly agree’ [ASA]. For level of Radiotherapy knowledge, VGEX scores changed from 0% (pre-) to 70.8% post-session; with all students (100%) showing a positive change in scores between the sessions, 79.2% by 2-or-more scale points. For the need for accurate RT, the change in ASA scores was from 83.3% to 100% (pre-to-post), with 50% of students showing a positive change in score. In terms of understanding Radiotherapy processes, the change was 0 to 75%, with 62.5% of participants showing a 2-or-more scale point change. Ten out of the 11 questions showed a statistically significant increase in scoring between the two sessions; 9 of the
Conclusion: The Ukrainian Personalized Project demonstrates that even amid war, innovation, education, and international collaboration can sustain and advance radiation oncology. This model offers a replicable framework for delivering sustainable cancer care and professional development in conflict-affected and resource-limited settings. Strengthening RTT education and expanding training opportunities will be essential for building a resilient and future-ready oncology workforce. References: 1) Radiotherapy Under the Falling Bombs: Lessons from UkraineKovalchuk, N. et al. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics, Volume 120, Issue 2, e763https://www.redjournal.org/article/S0360- 3016%2824%2902438-6/fulltext2) Radiotherapy in conflict: lessons from UkraineProf Pat Price et al. The Lancet Oncology, May 25, 2022https://www.globalradiotherapy.org/post/radioth erapy-in-conflict-lessons-from-ukraine Keywords: Radiotherapy, Ukraine
Digital Poster 2389
Made with FlippingBook - Share PDF online