Optimising the use of virtual and conventional simulation: a clinical and economic analysis

Background and purpose: Currently, optimal use of virtual simulation for all treatment sites is not entirely clear. This study presents data to identify specific patient groups for whom conventional simulation may be completely eliminated and replaced by virtual simulation. Sampling and method: Two hundred and sixty patients were recruited from four treatment sites (head and neck, breast, pelvis, and thorax). Patients were randomly assigned to be treated using the usual treatment process involving conventional simulation, or a treatment process differing only in the replacement of conventional plan verification with virtual verification. Data were collected on set-up accuracy at verification, and the number of unsatisfactory verifications requiring a return to the conventional simulator. A micro-economic costing analysis was also undertaken, whereby data for each treatment process episode were also collected: number and grade of staff present, and the time for each treatment episode. Results: The study shows no statistically significant difference in the number of returns to the conventional simulator for each site and study arm. Image registration data show similar quality of verification for each study arm. The micro-costing data show no statistical difference between the virtual and conventional simulation processes. Conclusions: At our institution, virtual simulation including virtual verification for the sites investigated presents no disadvantage compared to conventional simulation.

Estimation of fetal and effective dose for CT examinations

Doses from CT examinations are difficult to estimate. However, they are requested more frequently due to the increase in CT examinations. In particular, fetal dose estimations are frequently required for patients who have discovered, subsequent to the examination, that they were pregnant when the examination was conducted. A computer model has been developed to facilitate such dose calculations. This model combines empirical beam data with anatomical information. The model has been verified using thermoluminescent dosemeter (TLD) readings of internal and surface dose from both phantoms and patients, including intrauterine doses for patients undergoing afterloading gynaecological intracavitary treatment. Although only limited experimental data were available, the results indicate that the model accurately predicts uterine doses within acceptable errors. This approach has been validated for fetal dose estimation. The model was also used in a comparison with the nationally available CT dose data from the National Radiological Protection Board (NRPB). The two models were found to be in agreement for fetal dose estimations.