Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Sep;22(9):4-19.
doi: 10.1002/acm2.13366. Epub 2021 Aug 2.

Medical Physics Practice Guideline (MPPG) 11.a: Plan and chart review in external beam radiotherapy and brachytherapy

Affiliations

Medical Physics Practice Guideline (MPPG) 11.a: Plan and chart review in external beam radiotherapy and brachytherapy

Ping Xia et al. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2021 Sep.

Abstract

A therapeutic medical physicist is responsible for reviewing radiation therapy treatment plans and patient charts, including initial treatment plans and new chart review, on treatment chart (weekly) review, and end of treatment chart review for both external beam radiation and brachytherapy. Task group report TG 275 examined this topic using a risk-based approach to provide a thorough analysis and guidance for best practice. Considering differences in resources and workflows of various clinical practice settings, the Professional Council of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine assembled this task group to develop a practice guideline on the same topic to provide a minimum standard that balances an appropriate level of safety and resource utilization. This medical physics practice guidelines (MPPG) thus provides a concise set of recommendations for medical physicists and other clinical staff regarding the review of treatment plans and patient charts while providing specific recommendations about who to be involved, and when/what to check in the chart review process. The recommendations, particularly those related to the initial plan review process, are critical for preventing errors and ensuring smooth clinical workflow. We believe that an effective review process for high-risk items should include multiple layers with collective efforts across the department. Therefore, in this report, we make specific recommendations for various roles beyond medical physicists. The recommendations of this MPPG have been reviewed and endorsed by the American Society of Radiologic Technologists and the American Association of Medical Dosimetrists.

Keywords: MPPG 11.a; plan and chart review; safety and quality.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Kutcher GJ, Coia L, Gillin M, et al. Comprehensive QA for radiation oncology: report of AAPM Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group 40. Med Phys. 1994;21(4):581‐618. - PubMed
    1. Ding GX, Alaei P, Curran B, et al. Image guidance doses delivered during radiotherapy: quantification, management, and reduction: report of the AAPM Therapy Physics Committee Task Group 180. Med Phys. 2018;45(5):e84‐e99. - PubMed
    1. Klein EE, et al. Task Group 142 report: quality assurance of medical accelerators. Med Phys. 2009;36(9):4197‐4212. - PubMed
    1. Smith K, Balter P, Duhon J, et al. AAPM Medical Physics Practice Guideline 8.a.: linear accelerator performance tests. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2017;18(4):23‐39. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ford E, Conroy L, Dong L, et al. Strategies for effective physics plan and chart review in radiation therapy: Report of AAPM Task Group 275. Med Phys. 2020;47(6):e236‐e272. - PMC - PubMed