Overview of Data Management Planning Tools

These Data Management Plans are more comprehensive and complex than in the past. Libraries around the nation are trying to put together tools to help researchers write plans that conform to the new requirements. This session will look at some of these tools.

THE MULTIPLE LOCATION TIME WEIGHTED INDEX: USING PATIENT ACTIVITY SPACES TO CALCULATE PRIMARY CARE SERVICE AREAS

Geographic health planning analyses, such as service area calculations, are hampered by a lack of patient-specific geographic data. Using the limited patient address information in patient management systems, planners analyze patient origin based on home address. But activity space research done sparingly in public health and extensively in non-health related arenas uses multiple addresses per person when analyzing accessibility. Also, health care access research has shown that there are many non-geographic factors that influence choice of provider. Most planning methods, however, overlook non-geographic factors influencing choice of provider, and the limited data mean the analyses can only be related to home address. This research attempted to determine to what extent geography plays a part in patient choice of provider and to determine if activity space data can be used to calculate service areas for primary care providers. During Spring 2008, a convenience sample of 384 patients of a locally-funded Community Health Center in Houston, Texas, completed a survey that asked about what factors are important when he or she selects a health care provider. A subset of this group (336) also completed an activity space log that captured location and time data on the places where the patient regularly goes. Survey results indicate that for this patient population, geography plays a role in their choice of health care provider, but it is not the most important reason for choosing a provider. Other factors for choosing a health care provider such as the provider offering “free or low cost visits”, meeting “all of the patient’s health care needs”, and seeing “the patient quickly” were all ranked higher than geographic reasons. Analysis of the patient activity locations shows that activity spaces can be used to create service areas for a single primary care provider. Weighted activity-space-based service areas have the potential to include more patients in the service area since more than one location per patient is used. Further analysis of the logs shows that a reduced set of locations by time and type could be used for this methodology, facilitating ongoing data collection for activity-space-based planning efforts.

The multiple location time weighted index: Using patient activity spaces to calculate primary care service areas

Geographic health planning analyses, such as service area calculations, are hampered by a lack of patient-specific geographic data. Using the limited patient address information in patient management systems, planners analyze patient origin based on home address. But activity space research done sparingly in public health and extensively in non-health related arenas uses multiple addresses per person when analyzing accessibility. Also, health care access research has shown that there are many non-geographic factors that influence choice of provider. Most planning methods, however, overlook non-geographic factors influencing choice of provider, and the limited data mean the analyses can only be related to home address. This research attempted to determine to what extent geography plays a part in patient choice of provider and to determine if activity space data can be used to calculate service areas for primary care providers. ^ During Spring 2008, a convenience sample of 384 patients of a locally-funded Community Health Center in Houston, Texas, completed a survey that asked about what factors are important when he or she selects a health care provider. A subset of this group (336) also completed an activity space log that captured location and time data on the places where the patient regularly goes. ^ Survey results indicate that for this patient population, geography plays a role in their choice of health care provider, but it is not the most important reason for choosing a provider. Other factors for choosing a health care provider such as the provider offering "free or low cost visits", meeting "all of the patient's health care needs", and seeing "the patient quickly" were all ranked higher than geographic reasons. ^ Analysis of the patient activity locations shows that activity spaces can be used to create service areas for a single primary care provider. Weighted activity-space-based service areas have the potential to include more patients in the service area since more than one location per patient is used. Further analysis of the logs shows that a reduced set of locations by time and type could be used for this methodology, facilitating ongoing data collection for activity-space-based planning efforts. ^

COMPREHENSIVE CALCULATION-BASED IMRT QA USING R&V DATA, TREATMENT RECORDS, AND A SECOND TREATMENT PLANNING SYSTEM

Purpose: Traditional patient-specific IMRT QA measurements are labor intensive and consume machine time. Calculation-based IMRT QA methods typically are not comprehensive. We have developed a comprehensive calculation-based IMRT QA method to detect uncertainties introduced by the initial dose calculation, the data transfer through the Record-and-Verify (R&V) system, and various aspects of the physical delivery. Methods: We recomputed the treatment plans in the patient geometry for 48 cases using data from the R&V, and from the delivery unit to calculate the “as-transferred” and “as-delivered” doses respectively. These data were sent to the original TPS to verify transfer and delivery or to a second TPS to verify the original calculation. For each dataset we examined the dose computed from the R&V record (RV) and from the delivery records (Tx), and the dose computed with a second verification TPS (vTPS). Each verification dose was compared to the clinical dose distribution using 3D gamma analysis and by comparison of mean dose and ROI-specific dose levels to target volumes. Plans were also compared to IMRT QA absolute and relative dose measurements. Results: The average 3D gamma passing percentages using 3%-3mm, 2%-2mm, and 1%-1mm criteria for the RV plan were 100.0 (σ=0.0), 100.0 (σ=0.0), and 100.0 (σ=0.1); for the Tx plan they were 100.0 (σ=0.0), 100.0 (σ=0.0), and 99.0 (σ=1.4); and for the vTPS plan they were 99.3 (σ=0.6), 97.2 (σ=1.5), and 79.0 (σ=8.6). When comparing target volume doses in the RV, Tx, and vTPS plans to the clinical plans, the average ratios of ROI mean doses were 0.999 (σ=0.001), 1.001 (σ=0.002), and 0.990 (σ=0.009) and ROI-specific dose levels were 0.999 (σ=0.001), 1.001 (σ=0.002), and 0.980 (σ=0.043), respectively. Comparing the clinical, RV, TR, and vTPS calculated doses to the IMRT QA measurements for all 48 patients, the average ratios for absolute doses were 0.999 (σ=0.013), 0.998 (σ=0.013), 0.999 σ=0.015), and 0.990 (σ=0.012), respectively, and the average 2D gamma(5%-3mm) passing percentages for relative doses for 9 patients was were 99.36 (σ=0.68), 99.50 (σ=0.49), 99.13 (σ=0.84), and 98.76 (σ=1.66), respectively. Conclusions: Together with mechanical and dosimetric QA, our calculation-based IMRT QA method promises to minimize the need for patient-specific QA measurements by identifying outliers in need of further review.

Renal Cryoablation: Investigation of Periprocedural Visualization Tools and Treatment Response Quantification

Cryoablation for small renal tumors has demonstrated sufficient clinical efficacy over the past decade as a non-surgical nephron-sparing approach for treating renal masses for patients who are not surgical candidates. Minimally invasive percutaneous cryoablations have been performed with image guidance from CT, ultrasound, and MRI. During the MRI-guided cryoablation procedure, the interventional radiologist visually compares the iceball size on monitoring images with respect to the original tumor on separate planning images. The comparisons made during the monitoring step are time consuming, inefficient and sometimes lack the precision needed for decision making, requiring the radiologist to make further changes later in the procedure. This study sought to mitigate uncertainty in these visual comparisons by quantifying tissue response to cryoablation and providing visualization of the response during the procedure. Based on retrospective analysis of MR-guided cryoablation patient data, registration and segmentation algorithms were investigated and implemented for periprocedural visualization to deliver iceball position/size with respect to planning images registered within 3.3mm with at least 70% overlap and a quantitative logit model was developed to relate perfusion deficit in renal parenchyma visualized in verification images as a result of iceball size visualized in monitoring images. Through retrospective study of 20 patient cases, the relationship between likelihood of perfusion loss in renal parenchyma and distance within iceball was quantified and iteratively fit to a logit curve. Using the parameters from the logit fit, the margin for 95% perfusion loss likelihood was found to be 4.28 mm within the iceball. The observed margin corresponds well with the clinically accepted margin of 3-5mm within the iceball. In order to display the iceball position and perfusion loss likelihood to the radiologist, algorithms were implemented to create a fast segmentation and registration module which executed in under 2 minutes, within the clinically-relevant 3 minute monitoring period. Using 16 patient cases, the average Hausdorff distance was reduced from 10.1mm to 3.21 mm with average DSC increased from 46.6% to 82.6% before and after registration.