3590 - Resident-Led Quality Improvement Incentive Program in Radiation Oncology: 14-Year Experience at a Single Institution
Presenter(s)
A. S. Camarena1, S. Y. Wu2, N. D. Prionas1, K. Lichter1, L. Boreta1, S. E. Fogh3, S. E. Braunstein1, and L. Singer1; 1Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, 2Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, 3Division of Radiation Oncology and Division of Hematology and Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA
Purpose/Objective(s): The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) mandates radiation oncology (RO) resident participation in quality improvement (QI); however, the details of this involvement are not specified. In an ACGME-accredited RO residency program at a single institution, a structured QI incentive program has supported resident-driven QI education. This study evaluates the sustainability and scholarly impact of this program over a 14-year period. We hypothesized that a structured QI incentive program would facilitate sustained RO QI efforts and scholarly works.
Materials/Methods: On an annual basis, residents in a RO program were encouraged to develop, implement, and evaluate a QI project under faculty mentorship. At the completion of the academic year, residents were eligible for a financial incentive if the pre-determined QI goal was met. The primary outcome in this study was program sustainability, defined as the number of years with resident participation divided by the total number of program years. Scientific impact was measured by the number of scholarly works (manuscripts, abstracts, or posters) that resulted from resident-led QI projects. Project sustainability was also assessed, defined as continued efforts in the three years following the QI project. All data was obtained from retrospective review of projects and related presentations.
Results: From 2010-2024, RO residents led 13 QI projects as part of a QI incentive program. Projects were implemented in 13/14 years (93%). In 13/13 projects (100%), the predefined QI goal was met. All projects focused on improving various aspects of RO workflows. For example, one project aimed to complete a treatment planning session within three business days of initial routine consultation for 60% of patients treated with three-dimensional conformal radiation for painful bone metastases. Another project aimed to improve diagnostic coding accuracy to more than 90%. Over the 14 year period, 11/13 (85%) projects led to scholarly works. All project goals were sustained or integrated into practice in the department.
Conclusion: A structured, resident-led QI incentive program enabled the successful implementation of resident-driven QI projects in RO. The program aligned with ACGME requirements and contributed to residents’ scholarly output. Since this was a single-institution study, future efforts could focus on piloting this program at other institutions.