↓ Skip to main content

Setup errors in patients with head-neck cancer (HNC), treated using the Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) technique: how it influences the customised immobilisation systems, patient’s pain…

Overview of attention for article published in Radiation Oncology, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
83 Mendeley
Title
Setup errors in patients with head-neck cancer (HNC), treated using the Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) technique: how it influences the customised immobilisation systems, patient’s pain and anxiety
Published in
Radiation Oncology, April 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13014-017-0807-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Massimiliano Contesini, Monica Guberti, Roberta Saccani, Luca Braglia, Cinzia Iotti, Andrea Botti, Emilio Abbati, Marina Iemmi

Abstract

In patients with head-neck cancer treated with IMRT, immobility of the upper part of the body during radiation is maintained by means of customised immobilisation devices. The main purpose of this study was to determine how the procedures for preparation of customised immobilisation systems and the patients characteristics influence the extent of setup errors. A longitudinal, prospective study involving 29 patients treated with IMRT. Data were collected before CT simulation and during all the treatment sessions (528 setup errors analysed overall); the correlation with possible risk factors for setup errors was explored using a linear mixed model. Setup errors were not influenced by the patient's anxiety and pain. Temporary removal of the thermoplastic mask before carrying out the CT simulation shows statistically borderline, clinically relevant, increase of setup errors (+24.7%, 95% CI: -0.5% - 55.8%). Moreover, a unit increase of radiation therapists who model the customised thermoplastic mask is associated to a -18% (-29.2% - -4.9%) reduction of the errors. The setup error is influenced by the patient's physical features; in particular, it increases both in patients in whom the treatment position is obtained with 'Shoulder down' (+27.9%, 2.2% - 59.7%) and in patients with 'Scoliosis/kyphosis' problems (+65.4%, 2.3% - 164.2%). Using a 'Small size standard plus customized neck support device' is associated to a -52.3% (-73.7% - -11.2%) reduction. The increase in number of radiation therapists encountered during the entire treatment cycle does not show associations. Increase in the body mass index is associated with a slight reduction in setup error by (-2.8%, -5% - -0.7%). The position of the patient obtained by forcing the shoulders downwards, clinically significant scoliosis or kyphosis and the reduction of the number of radiation therapists who model the thermoplastic mask are found to be statistically significant risk factors that can cause an increase in setup errors, while the use of 'Small size' neck support device and patient BMI can diminish them.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 83 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 17 20%
Student > Master 11 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 7%
Student > Postgraduate 6 7%
Other 13 16%
Unknown 20 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 18 22%
Physics and Astronomy 7 8%
Psychology 4 5%
Social Sciences 2 2%
Other 9 11%
Unknown 20 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 April 2017.
All research outputs
#20,418,183
of 22,968,808 outputs
Outputs from Radiation Oncology
#1,689
of 2,066 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#269,443
of 309,813 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Radiation Oncology
#17
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,968,808 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,066 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 309,813 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.