Department of Anatomy and Cell Biology, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.
Department of Anatomy, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California.
Pract Radiat Oncol. 2022 Nov-Dec;12(6):e486-e492. doi: 10.1016/j.prro.2022.05.016. Epub 2022 Jun 8.
Although several different contouring instructional programs are available to radiation oncologists and trainees, very little is known about which methods and resources benefit learners most, and whether some learners may need alternate forms of instruction. This study aimed to determine the factors that were predictors of learners' success in anatomy, radiology, and contouring education.
Participants in the online and face-to-face Anatomy and Radiology Contouring (ARC) Bootcamp completed pre- and postintervention evaluations that assessed anatomy/radiology knowledge, contouring skills, self-confidence, and spatial ability. Baseline factors were assessed as predictors of outcomes across multiple educational domains.
One hundred and eighty (face-to-face: n = 40; online: n = 140) participants enrolled in the ARC Bootcamp, and 57 (face-to-face: n = 30; online: n = 27) participants completed both evaluations. Of the participants enrolled, 37% were female, and most were radiation oncology residents (62%). In the anatomy/radiology knowledge testing, all quartiles (based on baseline performance) improved numerically; however, the largest improvements occurred in learners with the lowest baseline scores (P < .001). At the end of the Bootcamp, learners with lower-performing scores did not reach the level of learners with the highest baseline scores (Bonferroni-corrected P < .001). Regarding the contouring assessment, improvements were only evident for the participants with lower-performing baseline scores (P < .05). Spatial anatomy skills, as measured by the spatial anatomy task, were correlated to contouring ability. Overall, the greatest improvements were seen for learners in postgraduate year 1 to 3, those with no previous rotation experience in a given discipline, and those who attended from other programs (ie, medical physics residents and medical students).
The ARC Bootcamp improved all levels of performers' anatomy and radiology knowledge but only lower-performers' contouring ability. The course alone does not help lower-performing learners reach the abilities of higher-performers. The ARC Bootcamp tends to be most beneficial for participants with less radiation oncology experience. Curriculum modifications can be made to help support ARC Bootcamp participants with lower performing scores.
虽然有几种不同的轮廓指导程序可供放射肿瘤学家和学员使用，但对于哪种方法和资源最有益于学习者，以及是否有些学习者可能需要其他形式的指导，人们知之甚少。本研究旨在确定哪些因素是学习者在解剖学、放射学和轮廓绘制教育中取得成功的预测因素。
参加在线和面对面解剖学和放射学轮廓（ARC）训练营的参与者完成了干预前后的评估，评估内容包括解剖学/放射学知识、轮廓绘制技能、自信心和空间能力。基线因素被评估为多个教育领域结果的预测因素。
180 名（面对面：n=40；在线：n=140）参与者参加了 ARC 训练营，其中 57 名（面对面：n=30；在线：n=27）参与者完成了两次评估。在参加者中，37%为女性，大多数为放射肿瘤学住院医师（62%）。在解剖学/放射学知识测试中，所有四分位数（基于基线表现）都在数值上有所提高；然而，在基线得分最低的学习者中，提高幅度最大（P<.001）。在训练营结束时，得分较低的学习者没有达到得分最高的学习者的水平（经 Bonferroni 校正的 P<.001）。关于轮廓评估，只有基线得分较低的参与者的表现有明显改善（P<.05）。空间解剖技能，如空间解剖任务所测量的，与轮廓绘制能力相关。总体而言，对于处于研究生第 1 年至第 3 年的学习者、没有特定学科轮转经验的学习者以及来自其他项目（即医学物理学住院医师和医学生）的学习者，他们的进步最大。
ARC 训练营提高了所有表现水平的学习者的解剖学和放射学知识，但只提高了表现较差的学习者的轮廓绘制能力。仅该课程并不能帮助表现较差的学习者达到表现较好的学习者的能力。ARC 训练营对放射肿瘤学经验较少的参与者最有益。可以进行课程修改，以帮助支持表现较差的 ARC 训练营参与者。
