Presenter(s)
B. Li1,2, S. Gray3, E. Kruse1,2, K. Kafka-Peterson4, J. C. Shiao5, K. H. Kang6, T. M. M. Ma7, M. S. Ning8, and A. Jhingran9; 1Rayos Contra Cancer, Seattle, WA, 2Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington/ Fred Hutch Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, 3Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, United States, 4University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, 5Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, 6Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington / Fred Hutch Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, 7Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington - Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, 8Department of Thoracic Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, 9Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
Purpose/Objective(s): Although nursing is a well-established profession in radiation oncology (RO), limited opportunities exist for nurses to receive RO-specific training, particularly in low-and-middle-income countries (LMICs). We aim to assess the effectiveness of a remote international curriculum for nurse participants in African LMICs.
Materials/Methods: From February to June 2025, we conducted a 14-session training program for nurses in 40 RO centers in Africa. Participants were recruited using digital flyers and open invitations for one month, and a partial snowball effect was observed. Enrollment was free, and the curriculum was designed by a U.S. team of volunteer nurse educators in radiation oncology. Training was provided in English, sessions were 60-90 minutes each, and interactive elements were used to promote live engagement, questions, and answers. Pre- and post- program surveys assessed confidence in 14 RO nursing domains using 1-5 Likert scores and knowledge using a 14-question multiple-choice clinical competency exam. These were analyzed using two-sided paired t-tests. Attendance and post-program feedback were collected, including qualitative comments. All powerpoint presentations, supplementary materials, and recordings were made available to participants after each session.
Results: A total of 438 clinicians (including 355 nurses) across 97 centers and 36 LMICs completed the pre-program survey, 219 (including 194 nurses) of which completed the post-program survey. Nursing experience with RO patients was 0 years (15.7%), 1-2 years (29.3%), 3-5 years (25.6%), 6-10 years (12.4%), and 10+ years (11.0%). Specializations (marking all that apply) included General Nurse (36.9%), Oncology Nurse (48.7%), RO Nurse (18.9%), and Other (4.5%). The average attendance was 222 participants per session, and attendees participated in an average of 8.7 of 14 sessions. Pre- vs. post- confidence scores increased from 2.95 to 3.86 out of 5 (p < 0.05), and mean knowledge scores rose from 7.24 to 9.0 out of 14 (p < 0.05). Furthermore, nearly all participants (97.3%) reported watching session recordings during the program, as shown in Table 1. Many reported a deepened sense of purpose after the course. The mean likelihood to recommend the training program was 9.78 out of 10.
Conclusion: Among a large cohort of recently trained nurses (most < 5 years’ experience) working with RO patients in LMICs, a remote curriculum was effective at improving confidence and knowledge scores across 14 professional domains. This program appears well-received and could be scaled to other regions globally.
Table 1. Number of session recordings watched by participants outside of lecture time| Number of session recordings viewed | Count of participants, n = 219 |
| 0 | 6 (2.7%) |
| 1-3 | 32 (14.6%) |
| 4-6 | 35 (16.0%) |
| 7-9 | 55 (25.1%) |
| 10-14 | 70 (32.0%) |
| Don't remember | 21 (10.0%) |