Application of failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) to pretreatment phases in tomotherapy

被引:49
作者
Broggi, Sara [1 ]
Cantone, Marie Claire [2 ]
Chiara, Anna [3 ]
Di Muzio, Nadia [3 ]
Longobardi, Barbara [1 ]
Mangili, Paola [1 ]
Veronese, Ivan [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Milan, Osped San Raffaele, Serv Fis Sanit, I-20127 Milan, Italy
[2] Univ Milan, Dipartimento Fis, I-20133 Milan, Italy
[3] Univ Milan, Osped San Raffaele, Serv Radioterapia, I-20127 Milan, Italy
来源
JOURNAL OF APPLIED CLINICAL MEDICAL PHYSICS | 2013年 / 14卷 / 05期
关键词
tomotherapy; failure mode and effects analysis; risk assessment; patient safety; QUALITY-ASSURANCE; RADIOTHERAPY;
D O I
10.1120/jacmp.v14i5.4329
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
The aim of this paper was the application of the failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) approach to assess the risks for patients undergoing radiotherapy treatments performed by means of a helical tomotherapy unit. FMEA was applied to the preplanning imaging, volume determination, and treatment planning stages of the tomotherapy process and consisted of three steps: 1) identification of the involved subprocesses; 2) identification and ranking of the potential failure modes, together with their causes and effects, using the risk probability number (RPN) scoring system; and 3) identification of additional safety measures to be proposed for process quality and safety improvement. RPN upper threshold for little concern of risk was set at 125. A total of 74 failure modes were identified: 38 in the stage of preplanning imaging and volume determination, and 36 in the stage of planning. The threshold of 125 for RPN was exceeded in four cases: one case only in the phase of preplanning imaging and volume determination, and three cases in the stage of planning. The most critical failures appeared related to (i) the wrong or missing definition and contouring of the overlapping regions, (ii) the wrong assignment of the overlap priority to each anatomical structure, (iii) the wrong choice of the computed tomography calibration curve for dose calculation, and (iv) the wrong (or not performed) choice of the number of fractions in the planning station. On the basis of these findings, in addition to the safety strategies already adopted in the clinical practice, novel solutions have been proposed for mitigating the risk of these failures and to increase patient safety.
引用
收藏
页码:265 / 277
页数:13
相关论文
共 20 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], 2008, RENTGENOL RADIOL
  • [2] Begnozzi L., 2013, RADIOPROTECTION, DOI [10.1051/radiopro/2013079, DOI 10.1051/RADI0PR0/2013079]
  • [3] Results of a two-year quality control program for a helical tornotherapy unit
    Broggi, Sara
    Cattaneo, Giovanni Mauro
    Molinelli, Silvia
    Maggiulli, Eleonora
    Del Vecchio, Antonetta
    Longobardi, Barbara
    Perna, Lucia
    Fazio, Ferruccio
    Calandrino, Riccardo
    [J]. RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2008, 86 (02) : 231 - 241
  • [4] Application of failure mode and effects analysis to treatment planning in scanned proton beam radiotherapy
    Cantone, Marie Claire
    Ciocca, Mario
    Dionisi, Francesco
    Fossati, Piero
    Lorentini, Stefano
    Krengli, Marco
    Molinelli, Silvia
    Orecchia, Roberto
    Schwarz, Marco
    Veronese, Ivan
    Vitolo, Viviana
    [J]. RADIATION ONCOLOGY, 2013, 8
  • [5] Ciocca Mario, 2012, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, V82, pe305, DOI 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2011.05.010
  • [6] Probabilistic fault tree analysis of a radiation treatment system
    Ekaette, Edidiong
    Lee, Robert C.
    Cooke, David L.
    Iftody, Sandra
    Craighead, Peter
    [J]. RISK ANALYSIS, 2007, 27 (06) : 1395 - 1410
  • [7] EVALUATION OF SAFETY IN A RADIATION ONCOLOGY SETTING USING FAILURE MODE AND EFFECTS ANALYSIS
    Ford, Eric C.
    Gaudette, Ray
    Myers, Lee
    Vanderver, Bruce
    Engineer, Lilly
    Zellars, Richard
    Song, Danny Y.
    Wong, John
    DeWeese, Theodore L.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2009, 74 (03): : 852 - 858
  • [8] Minimising activity and dose with enhanced image quality by radiopharmaceutical administrations
    Hoeschen, C.
    Mattsson, S.
    Cantone, M. C.
    Mikuz, M.
    Lacasta, C.
    Ebel, G.
    Clinthorne, N.
    Giussani, A.
    [J]. RADIATION PROTECTION DOSIMETRY, 2010, 139 (1-3) : 250 - 253
  • [9] A method for evaluating quality assurance needs in radiation therapy
    Huq, M. Saiful
    Fraass, Benedick A.
    Dunscombe, Peter B.
    Gibbons, John P., Jr.
    Ibbott, Geoffrey S.
    Medin, Paul M.
    Mundt, Arno
    Mutic, Sassa
    Palta, Jatinder R.
    Thomadsen, Bruce R.
    Williamson, Jeffrey F.
    Yorke, Ellen D.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2008, 71 (01): : S170 - S173
  • [10] ICRP, 2009, ANN ICRP, V39, P1