Service quality Benchmarking new systems
Transcription
Service quality Benchmarking new systems
SCOPE INSTITUTE OF PHYSICS AND ENGINEERING IN MEDICINE | www.ipem.ac.uk | Volume 24 Issue 1 | MARCH 2015 Service quality Benchmarking new systems Delivering sonographic education and training Person-centred care Quality measure? ISO 15189 with peer review and accreditation ISO 9001 certificated + peer review ISO 14971 certificated ISO 9001 certificated No system – do your best Image processing and analysis using ImageJ Quality management systems P08 JOB SATISFACTION LEVELS Staff work–life balance in the radiography and physics workforce P32 NEWS ON POLICY UPDATES Keeping you up-to-date on IPEM’s work to influence policy P50 FROM THE BES TO IPEM The discipline gains recognition and merges with the IPEM 1RWDOOPHGLFDO HTXLSPHQWWUDLQLQJ SURYLGHUVDUHWKH VDPH+HUHȇVZK\Ȑ : :LWK LWK $ $YHQV\V YHQV\V 7 7UDLQLQJ UDLQLQJ $ $FDGHP\ FDGHP\ \ \RX RX J JHW HW WWKH KH S SUDFWLFDO UDFWLFDO 7KH8.ȇV2QO\/HYHO'LSORPDȐOHDGLQJ 7 KH8.ȇV2QO\/HYHO'LSORPDȐOHDGLQJ X XS S WWR R G GDWH DWH N NQRZOHGJH QRZOHGJH D DQG QG X XQGHUVWDQGLQJ QGHUVWDQGLQJ WWKDW KDW FFRPHV RPHV WWR%6F+RQV(QJLQHHULQJ0DQDJHPHQW R%6F+RQV(QJLQHHULQJ0DQDJHPHQW HDGLQJ RQO\ 7UDLQLQJ $FDGHP\ SDUW RI D OOHDGLQJ IIURP URP WWKH KH R QO\ 7 UDLQLQJ $ FDGHP\ WWKDWȇV KDWȇ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ΖΖWV RXUVH FFXUUHQWO\ XUUHQWO\ UUXQQLQJ XQQLQJ LLQ Q WWKH KH 8 . ΖΖW W LLV V HTXLSPHQW / /HYHO HYHO FFRXUVH 8. DQJH R I H TXLSPHQW WWR R VVLPXODWH LPXODWH DQ KDV DQ H[WHQVLYH RI HTXLSPHQW K DV D Q H [WHQVLYH UUDQJH ZRUNEDVHG FRXUVH FRXUVH ZLWK ZLWK RQH RQH ZHHNHQG ZHHNHQG SHU SHU DQ PRQWK PRQWK ZRUNEDVHG DFOLQLFDOHQYLURQPHQW D FOLQLFDOHQYLURQPHQW PRGXOH PRGXOH DW DW WKH WKH $YHQV\V $YHQV\V 7UDLQLQJ 7UDLQLQJ $FDGHP\ $FDGHP\ 'HVLJQHG 'HVLJQHG IRU IRU PHGLFDO P H G L F D O H HQJLQHHUV Q J L Q H H U V L LQ Q I IXOOWLPH X O O W L P H H HPSOR\PHQW P S O R \ P H Q W L LW W J JLYHV L Y H V Ζ Ζ+((0 + ( ( 0 XQE\KLJKO\H[SHULHQFHGH[0R'5R\DO(OHFWULFDODQG ȏ 55XQE\KLJKO\H[SHULHQFHGH[0R'5R\DO(OHFWULFDODQG PHPEHUVKLSIRUWKHGXUDWLRQRIWKHFRXUVH P H P E H U V K L S I R U W K H G X U D W L R Q R I W K H F R X U V H 0HFKDQLFDO(QJLQHHUVZKRDUHH[SHUWWUDLQHUVDFURVVDOO 0HFKDQLFDO(QJLQHHUVZKRDUHH[SHUWWUDLQHUVDFURVVDOO HTXLSPHQW HTXLSPHQW KH$YHQV\VWHDPKDVEHHQUHVSRQVLEOHIRUGHYHORSLQJ ȏ 77KH$YHQV\VWHDPKDVEHHQUHVSRQVLEOHIRUGHYHORSLQJ WKHPDMRULW\RIJHQHULFELRPHGLFDOHTXLSPHQWWUDLQLQJ WKH PDMRULW\ RI JHQHULF ELRPHGLFDO HTXLSPHQW WUDLQLQJ FRXUVHVDFURVVWKH8. FRXUVHVDFURVVWKH8. $YHQV\VRHUVWKH8.ȇVZLGHVWUDQJHRISUDFWLFDOEDVHG ȏ $YHQV\VRHUVWKH8.ȇVZLGHVWUDQJHRISUDFWLFDOEDVHG PHGLFDOHTXLSPHQWWUDLQLQJFRXUVHV PHGLFDOHTXLSPHQWWUDLQLQJFRXUVHV URPOHYHOWRWKH8.ȇVRQO\/HYHO'LSORPDLQ0HGLFDO ȏ ))URPOHYHOWRWKH8.ȇ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ȴHGZKLOH\RXZRUNZLWKGLVWDQFHOHDUQLQJ ȏ %%HFRPHTXDOLȴHGZKLOH\RXZRUNZLWKGLVWDQFHOHDUQLQJ ' LVWDQFH/HDUQLQJIRU%XV\(QJLQHHUV 'LVWDQFH/HDUQLQJIRU%XV\(QJLQHHUV $YHQV\V $ YHQV\V XQGHUVWDQGV XQGHUVWDQGV WWKH KH SUHVVXUHV SUHVVXUHV R RQ Q WWLPH LPH IIRU RU Z ZRUNLQJ RUNLQJ HQJLQHHUV HQJLQHHUV DQG DQG (%0( (%0( GHSDUWPHQWV GHSDUWPHQWV VR VR WKH WKH QHZ QHZ $YHQV\V $YHQV\V /HYHO'LSORPDDQG%6F+RQVWRSXSDUHGLVWDQFHOHDUQLQJ /HYHO'LSORPDDQG%6F+RQVWRSXSDUHGLVWDQFHOHDUQLQJ FRXUVHV FRXUVHV DOORZLQJ DOORZLQJ \ \RX RX WR WR HDUQ HDUQ UHFRJQLVHG UHFRJQLVHG TXDOLȴFDWLRQV TXDOLȴFDWLRQV LQ LQ \RXUFKRVHQHPSOR\PHQWZKLOVWHDUQLQJDZDJH \RXUFKRVHQHPSOR\PHQWZKLOVWHDUQLQJDZDJH )RUPRUHLQIRUPDWLRQ )RUPRUHLQIRUPDWLRQ DQGFRXUVHGHWDLOV D QGFRXUVHGHWDLOV $FFUHGLWHGWKURXJKWKH2SHQ&ROOHJH1HWZRUNDQG $FFUHGLWHGWKURXJKWKH2SHQ&ROOHJH1HWZRUNDQG OOLVWHGRQWKH4XDOLȴFDWLRQ&UHGLW)UDPHZRUN LVWHGRQWKH4XDOLȴFDWLRQ&UHGLW)UDPHZRUN 9LVLWZZZDYHQV\VPHGLFDOFRXN 9LVLWZZZDYHQV\VPHGLFDOFRXN &DOORU & DOORU (PDLOWUDLQLQJ#DYHQV\VPHGLFDOFRXN ( PDLOWUDLQLQJ#DYHQV\VPHGLFDOFRXN CONTENTS THIS ISSUE FEATURES 14 Cover feature: Benchmarking service quality Accreditation or certification? How do we assess quality and how will new healthcare systems fit? 19 Delivering sonographic education and training Promoting better standards in ultrasound education through an innovative accreditation partnership 21 Person-centred care: health technology management The process of care from the patient and carer perspective with relevance for health technology management 26 ImageJ: image processing and analysis in Java Software offering basic tools and processing techniques required to view and manipulate medical images 35 MEETING REPORTS 35 38 42 42 7th World Congress of Biomechanics and a research visit George Adams IEEE Engineering and Medicine in Biology Conference Claire Tarbert Medical Physics and Engineering Conference Laura Moran OBITUARY 49 Dr Jonathan Whybrow HISTORICAL FEATURE 50 Part 5: From the BES to the IPEM Concluding our historical series as the discipline gains recognition, develops journals and merges with the IPEM REGULARS 36 04 05 06 07 32 33 44 President’s letter Charity is close to home CEO’s column Public Engagement Panel Editor’s comment Delivering news Journal club news An interesting article on job satisfaction Policy update Recent issues and work on policies Technologist news Dosimetric effects of tissue swelling Book reviews Latest books, reviews, reports and newsletters 40 SCOPE | MARCH 2015 | 03 PRESIDENT’S LETTER Charity is close to home Stephen Keevil is keen for members to know more about how IPEM functions as a charity and hopes that more members will have their say t comes as a surprise to some people to discover that IPEM is a charity, a term that usually brings to mind organisations that support people in need, or perhaps care for our heritage or the environment. The RSPCA and RSPB, amongst the largest charities in the UK, provide a different kind of support again. IPEM seems very different to these examples, but under law any organisation that exists for the public benefit and meets any of a wide range of criteria can register as a charity, not just those that rattle tins and run shops in the high street! Like any charity, IPEM is ultimately governed by its Board of Trustees. Most of IPEM’s trustees are members of the Institute: the President and honorary officers, and three others representing the broader membership. There are also two independent trustees who are not members, bringing a wider range of skills and perspectives. The Board recently agreed to expand this broader input, and to recognise the degree of financial strategic planning needed by a growing organisation, by appointing for the first time an Honorary Treasurer who is not a member. David Ellis combines a first degree in physics with a long and successful career in engineering and technology, including 12 years of board-level experience. David succeeds our previous Honorary Treasurer, Paul Robbins, and it is a great tribute to Paul that we have had to look to someone with experience of this kind to replace the expertise that he has developed over the past 5 years. I “ “ STEPHEN KEEVIL President Trustees monitor progress against this plan at each Board meeting The Charity Commission website has a very clear and succinct statement about the role of charity trustees: they ‘have overall control of a charity and are responsible for making sure it’s doing what it was set up to do’. In the case of a relatively large organisation like IPEM, trustees largely discharge this duty by ensuring that we have an appropriate mix of expertise amongst our volunteers and staff to deliver the work of the Institute in a way that is effective, efficient and compliant with the law. But the trustees cannot avoid or delegate the ultimate legal responsibility that they have, and so the Board meets four times a year to provide oversight, scrutiny and, very importantly, strategic direction. 04 | MARCH 2015 | SCOPE The overall strategy adopted by the Board can be found at: http://www.ipem.ac.uk/Portals/0/Documents/Profess ional%20Matters/Strategy/IPEM%20strategic%20obj ectives%202012%20-%2014.pdf. This document sets out IPEM’s charitable purpose and seven key strategic objectives flowing from this. Each year, the Institute’s various committees are asked to contribute to an action plan based around these objectives, and trustees monitor progress against this plan at each Board meeting. Keen-eyed members will object that a strategy document dated ‘2012–14’ is overdue for review! In fact, trustees decided that the 2014 review should focus on four key areas highlighted in the last member survey: regional structures, volunteering, policy work and public engagement. A more comprehensive review is planned for later in 2015. The results of this focussed review were considered by the Board in January. A summary will be made available to members via the website. There were a number of very helpful suggestions, which will either be acted on or referred to the relevant committee for further consideration and development. However, there was a disappointing level of engagement from the membership, and some of the actions proposed are things that the Institute is already doing. It is encouraging that members approve of work that is already underway, but worrying that they are not aware that this is the case! Now that new membership rules are in place, it is timely to develop a new membership strategy. This will include plans for recruiting new members of course, but it is clear that we also need better ways of engaging members in activities like the strategy review, and also communicating with members so that they are more aware of what we are doing. One particularly significant way of engaging is to stand for office in IPEM. Several positions fall vacant in September, and it would be great to have a strong field of candidates for members to choose between. Vacancies will be advertised soon through the newsletter and website. We would welcome applications from members from all backgrounds and at all stages of their careers. It is not true that members have to be approached before they can apply! If you are interested but need more information about the nature of the work or the commitment involved, feel free to contact current office holders or me directly via president@ipem.ac.uk. CEO’S COLUMN Public Engagement Panel Rosemary Cook CBE provides a recap on IPEM’s initiative to involve ‘lay’ people in its activities and deliver its charitable objectives ince the Trustees decided in July last year to set up a Public Engagement Panel (PEP) for IPEM, work has been going on to make this a reality. However, responses to the recent strategy review show that some members would like to know more about the initiative – so here is a quick recap. As a charity with public benefit as its main purpose, IPEM has long involved ‘lay’ people – people from outside of the membership professions – in its structures. We have had ‘independent’ trustees for many years, bringing a different perspective to the Board’s decision-making than that of the officers and member trustees, as well as additional skills to add to the expertise of members: skills such as marketing, communications, governance and legal knowledge. IPEM also has lay people involved in its professional conduct committee, in line with good practice. S “ “ It will help deliver IPEM’s charitable objective to advance public education ROSEMARY COOK CBE Chief Executive Officer ▼ The Public Engagement Panel is designed to go a step further, by involving lay people proactively in a wider range of IPEM’s activities. This has been partly stimulated by the need to involve lay people in the management of the Register of Clinical Technologists, in order to meet the good practice requirements of the Professional Standards Authority. But it will also help to deliver on IPEM’s charitable objective to advance public education about physics and engineering applied to medicine. The PEP’s Terms of Reference, approved by the Trustees in October, can be found on the website: follow the link on the home page under Public information. The Panel has four main aims: n To help ensure that IPEM’s strategy and activities are focussed on achievement of its charitable objectives. n To improve IPEM’s engagement and communication with public audiences. n To bring a public perspective to inform IPEM’s policy responses, regulatory activities, etc. n To link with other public engagement bodies in the fields of healthcare and science, as appropriate. The PEP will be chaired by an independent trustee, and Danielle Ross has agreed to be the first incumbent. Members will also include a member trustee, plus a number of lay people who volunteer to become involved. The Panel will meet twice a year, but members will be engaged on different pieces of work by email between meetings. Initially, PEP members may be asked to: n Assess the content and accessibility of the website or publications from a public perspective. n Review strategic plans to check that they will help achieve our charitable objectives. n Advise on our public engagement programme and activities. n Help judge awards for public–scientist partnership work. n Suggest new ways to present members’ work to enhance patients’ and the public’s understanding of healthcare science. n Help recruit volunteers to assist with our work. n Help target our careers and outreach work to new audiences. n Input into national consultations or initiatives from a public perspective. n Comment on course documentation from a lay perspective. n Provide an individual to join a specific working group or committee when required, to bring a lay perspective to its work. IPEM has been recruiting to the Panel since January, via many local, regional and national networks. We have stressed that this is not a patient involvement panel, and the panel will not be asked to comment on specific services. We aim to hold an initial information workshop for volunteers to learn more about IPEM and about the kind of activities they might be involved in, after which the membership of the Panel will be finalised. Members can keep up with developments via the PEP pages on the website. If you would like the panel to assist with any specific work of a group you are involved in for IPEM, don’t hesitate to contact the office to arrange this SCOPE | MARCH 2015 | 05 EDITOR’S COMMENT Delivering news very warm welcome to all! We have another spectacular issue of Scope incorporating a new section on policy work undertaken by the IPEM. This new section was added in response to the general IPEM survey (2013). CEO Rosemary Cook compiled this section to keep you up-to-date. You asked; we delivered! During a major clear-out at home earlier this year, I stumbled upon a glossy old issue of Scope. Remarkably, the magazine has undergone a number of significant changes in the last couple of decades. The increase in submissions and improvement in general design is thanks to all your contributions, that of the previous Editors and the publishing house. In light of our recent Scope survey, we hope to make many more enhancements to the magazine. To kick-start this process, we will soon be publishing the survey results, so please watch this space! In a thought-provoking article, Edwin Claridge talks about the new quality management systems (QMS) for medical physics and clinical engineering services, providing a personal view of the development of UK healthcare science quality systems. His discourse covers differences between old vs new, certification vs accreditation and the scope of the QMS. Those with an appetite for anything ImageJ or working in nuclear medicine will want to read the stimulating article written by Gregory James. In addition to covering the basics, he considers benefits and need and compares ImageJ to other software packages, its use in the clinical context and the availability of curve-fitting tools and plugins. Is recruitment and retention of staff a problem in your department? We have a great journal club article on job satisfaction levels of the physics and radiography workforce in radiotherapy. A survey stressed the importance of professional development, staff support and prevention of burnout. All these aspects must certainly contribute to improvements in patient safety. Good management practices outlined may benefit medical physics and clinical engineering departments in general. Definitely, a must read. David Stange highlights an interesting article in the Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics on the dosimetric effects of tissue swelling during helical tomotherapy breast irradiation. A study looked at quantifying underand over-dosage and surface doses during the treatment of breast carcinoma – these are important considerations at the radiotherapy replanning stage. Once again, we have an exciting mix of book reviews and medical physics newsletters. Kirsten Hughes presents three engaging travel bursary reports, covering the 7th World Congress of Biomechanics, the IEEE Engineering and Medicine in Biology conference and the Medical Physics and Engineering Conference and Biennial Radiotherapy Physics Meeting. Those looking forward to Stanley Salmon’s biomedical engineering historical series will find the final installment in this issue. He concludes this inspiring article by talking about the Biological Engineering Society and its integration into what is now known as IPEM! I am really thankful to Stanley for his quality contributions over the last five issues of Scope. We hope you thoroughly enjoy this issue! A Scope is the quarterly magazine of the Institute of Physics and Engineering in Medicine IPEM Fairmount House, 230 Tadcaster Road, York, YO24 1ES T 01904 610821 F 01904 612279 E office@ipem.ac.uk W www.ipem.ac.uk W www.scopeonline.co.uk EDITOR-IN-CHIEF Usman I. Lula Principal Clinical Scientist, 1st Floor, Radiotherapy, Building, Medical Physics University, Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Queen Elizabeth Medical Centre, Birmingham, UK B15 2TH T 0121 371 5056 E usman.lula@uhb.nhs.uk ASSISTANT EDITOR Dr Hazel Starritt Consultant Clinical Scientist Head of Diagnostic Imaging Physics, Medical Physics and Bioengineering Royal United Hospital Bath NHS Trust, Combe Park, Bath BA1 3NG T 01225 824085 E hazelstarritt@nhs.net MEETING REPORTS EDITOR Kirsten Hughes Trainee Clinical Scientist Radiotherapy, North Wales Medical Physics, Glan Clwyd Hospital T 01745 445113 E Kirsten.Hughes2@wales. nhs.uk NEWS EDITORS Usman I. Lula Principal Clinical Scientist, 1st Floor, Radiotherapy Building,Medical Physics, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Queen Elizabeth Medical Centre, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK B15 2TH T 0121 371 5056 E usman.lula@uhb.nhs.uk and Richard A. Amos Operational Lead for Proton Beam Therapy Physics, Radiotherapy Physics Department, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, 1st Floor East – 250 Euston Road,London NW1 2PG T 0203 447 2369 E richard.amos@uclh.nhs.uk BOOK REVIEW EDITOR Usman I. Lula Principal Clinical Scientist, 1st Floor, Radiotherapy, Building, Medical Physics University, Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Queen Elizabeth Medical Centre, Birmingham, UK B15 2TH T 0121 371 5056 E usman.lula@uhb.nhs.uk ACADEMIC EDITOR Professor Malcolm Sperrin Director of Medical Physics Royal Berkshire NHS, Foundation Trust, London Road, Reading, RG1 5AN E Malcolm.Sperrin@royal berkshire.nhs.uk ‘ ERRATUM In my last hardcopy editorial, it was Angela Cotton who had stepped down as Meeting Reports Editor. Thanks to Angela Newing for highlighting this! USMAN I. LULA EDITOR-IN-CHIEF 06 | MARCH 2015 | SCOPE INTERNATIONAL EDITOR (Developing countries) Andrew Gammie Clinical Engineer, Bristol Urological Institute, BS10 5NB T +44(0)117 950 5050 extension 2448 or 5184 E agammie@iee.org INTERNATIONAL EDITOR (North America) Richard A. Amos Operational Lead for Proton Beam Therapy Physics, Radiotherapy Physics Department, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, 1st Floor East – 250 Euston Road,London NW1 2PG T 0203 447 2369 E richard.amos@uclh.nhs.uk CLINICAL TECHNOLOGIST NEWS EDITOR Position vacant Trevor Williams and Dave Stange Senior Clinical Technologists,1st Floor, Radiotherapy Building, Medical Physics, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Queen Elizabeth Medical Centre, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK B15 2TH T 0121 371 5051 E david.stange@uhb.nhs.uk E Trevor.williams@uhb.nhs.uk Published on behalf of the Institute of Physics and Engineering in Medicine by CENTURY ONE PUBLISHING LTD. Alban Row, 27–31 Verulam Road, St Albans, Herts, AL3 4DG T 01727 893 894 F 01727 893 895 E enquiries@centuryone publishing.uk W www.centuryone publishing.uk ADVERTISING SALES David Murray T 01727 739 182 E d.murray@centuryone publishing.uk DESIGN & PRODUCTION Heena Gudka E studio@centuryone publishing.uk SUB EDITOR Karen Mclaren E karen@centuryone publishing.uk PRINTED BY Century One Publishing Ltd Scope is published quarterly by the Institute of Physics and Engineering in Medicine but the views expressed are not necessarily the official views of the Institute. Authors instructions and copyright agreement can be found on the IPEM website. Articles should be sent to the appropriate member of the editorial team. By submitting to Scope, you agree to transfer copyright to IPEM. We reserve the right to edit your article. Proofs are not sent to contributors. The integrity of advertising material cannot be guaranteed. Copyright Reproduction in whole or part by any means without written permission of the publisher is strictly forbidden. © IPEM 2015 ISSN 0964-9565 MHRA – incident handling update: new reporting system and safety positions REGULATION AND SAFETY The way the MHRA handles adverse incidents involving medical devices is changing. The agency is setting up an integrated and simplified system of reporting with NHS England. This means you can report incidents once, through a single route instead of reporting to several organisations. Crucial to the development of this system is a network of Medical Device Safety Officers (MDSO) and Medication Safety Officers (MSO). These have widened and replaced the Medical Device Liaison Officer (MDLO) network. What this means for you? n Continue to report incidents separately to MHRA and NRLS (National Reporting and Learning System) until your organisation is verified for single route reporting. n There are better-defined reporting criteria for you to use, described in the patient safety alert ‘Improving medical device incident reporting and learning’, published in March 2014. This also gives details of the new system and how healthcare organisations should nominate an MDSO. n Find out who the MDSO is in your organisation. The MHRA and NHS England are: n Asking larger healthcare organisations in the NHS and independent sector to nominate MDSOs and MSOs. n Testing the system at several sites for each of the major local risk management system providers to develop toolkits. n Running conferences. Details will be available on the MHRA website. n Running monthly online seminars for MDSOs. n Encouraging the use of the Patient Safety First website for the exchange of medical device safety information, including recordings of online seminars. ‘ Louise Mulroy is a Senior Medical Device Specialist at the MHRA Imaging, Acute and Community Care Unit which is part of the Agency’s Devices Division. She works in the device areas covering anaesthetic, breathing and vascular devices MHRA – unique device identifiers for medical devices based on barcodes UDI COMPLIANT LABEL: What a UDI looks like on a manufacturer’s product label: human readable (under the barcode) and AIDC format REGULATION AND SAFETY Unique device identifiers (UDIs) for medical devices are being introduced in Europe and the USA to unambiguously identify specific medical devices. UDIs will be based upon established labelling/barcoding systems – most commonly GS1 Global Trade Identification Numbers (GTINs) or HIBCC Labeller Identification Codes (LICs). UDIs applied to devices (and in particular implants) or their labels, documented in a UDI database, and used consistently throughout distribution and use, should facilitate a number of patient safety benefits, including: n traceability of devices; n the identification of devices in adverse events reports and other postmarket safety surveillance activities; n recalls and other field safety correction, and n reducing medical errors. In order to establish a national system for recording and analysing UDI information for implants the MHRA and key partners will need to develop: n local systems for inputting implant barcodes – in the form of UDIs – into existing hospital patient electronic record systems and storing the information locally; n national standards and systems for transferring local patient electronic records incorporating UDIs into a national database – HES or care.data, and n systems and associated governance frameworks for analysing the national data using the MHRA Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD). The MHRA is currently undertaking a project to establish the feasibility of the first point above. This will look at the practicalities of incorporating the information contained in the barcodes which manufacturers are currently placing on implant labels into existing hospital patient electronic record systems. The information will be collected in real time in real clinical environments and stored locally, ensuring that it will be readily retrievable from the hospital record system for onward transmission and further analysis. The MHRA has already had discussions with a number of potential pilot sites, but thus far none of them have been able to move forward on this work, mainly because of issues around integration of existing electronic record systems within hospitals and around engagement of clinical staff. The Agency is currently working with Portsmouth Hospitals with the aim of establishing them as a beacon centre to collect UDIs as part of their existing hospital patient electronic record systems. MHRA would welcome the assistance of IPEM members in promoting the introduction/development of such systems within their Trusts. If you are interested, please contact Mike Peel (Michael.Peel@mhra.gsi.gov. uk) or Andy Crosbie (Andrew.Crosbie@mhra.gsi.gov.uk) at MHRA. ‘ Andy Crosbie is Head of the MHRA Biosciences and Implants Unit, which is part of the Agency’s Devices Division. He has a particular interest in medical device post-market surveillance and implant registries and he currently leads work within the Agency on the use of unique device identification (UDI) to improve patient safety SCOPE | MARCH 2015 | 07 JOURNAL CLUB NEWS BY USMAN I. LULA AND RICHARD AMOS Job satisfaction levels in UK radiotherapy centres: radiography and physics workforce MANAGEMENT Staff work–life balance can be impacted by workload pressures such as evening, weekend and bank holiday working. Employers need to give consideration to the Flexible Working Regulations effective from April 2014. Increased provision and appropriate interventions are required to achieve the aim of delivering world-class radiotherapy. Retaining and developing an adequate resourced, skilled and committed workforce will be a key factor in future success. The UK Francis report (2013) highlighted the tragic consequences of systems failure coupled with health professionals suffering from the effects of compassion fatigue. Healthcare is hugely rewarding, and paradoxically emotionally strenuous. The combination of associated individual, interpersonal and organisational challenges are primary drivers for burnout. The subsequent Berwick report (2013) highlighted that good people can fail to meet patients’ needs when their working conditions do not provide them with the conditions for success. A strong relationship exists between employee satisfaction and patients’ perceptions of the quality of their care. Organisations and leaders can significantly influence an individual’s satisfaction. Obtaining an understanding of the work experiences of radiotherapy professionals will support the development of strategies to increase job satisfaction, productivity and effectiveness. In this recently published work, a quantitative survey was conducted assessing job satisfaction, attitudes to incident reporting, stress and burnout, opportunities for professional development, workload, retention and turnover. All questions were taken from validated instruments or adapted from the UK NHS survey. The survey yielded 658 completed responses (16 per cent response rate), from the public and private sectors (see table 1). Responses were received from 74 of the 75 sites (NHS and private providers) delivering radiotherapy in the UK. Over a third of respondents were classified as satisfied for job satisfaction with 11 per cent dissatisfied and the remaining 53 per cent ambivalent. A significant proportion of clinical staff (38 per cent) reported high emotional exhaustion and low professional accomplishment. Presenteeism was an issue with 42 per cent attending work despite feeling unable to fulfil their role. A significant proportion (42 per cent of respondents) felt they didn’t get the recognition they deserved for doing a good job. A statistically significant difference was also evident between departments. In the non-clinical group over a quarter of respondents reported high levels of cynicism. The majority of respondents stated an increase in the intensity and pace of work in the past 12 months. The increase was attributed to a combination of factors such as staffing levels, lack of resources and administrative support. Significant workload was frequently preventing staff from undertaking learning and development opportunities. TABLE 1 [TOP LEFT]: Response by professional group TABLE 2 [BOTTOM LEFT]: Job satisfaction survey (JSS) data with scoring key compared with a comparative norm of nurses All tables kindly supplied by Daniel Hutton, The Clatterbridge Cancer Centre, NHS Foundation Trust, England, UK. © The British Institute of Radiology 2014. Hutton D, Beardmore C, Patel I, Massey J, Wong H, Probst H. Audit of the job satisfaction levels of the UK radiography and physics workforce in UK radiotherapy centres 2012. Brit J Radiol 2014; 83: 20130742 08 | MARCH 2015 | SCOPE JOURNAL CLUB NEWS BY USMAN I. LULA AND RICHARD AMOS National targets were cited as impacting on workload, particularly the managers, e.g. the radiotherapy dataset, Trust and national waiting time standards (see tables 2 and 3). Job satisfaction is multifaceted; it is dependent on the individual, context of work and environment. The remaining facets of supervision, contingent rewards, operating conditions, co-workers, nature of work and communication can be significantly influenced by service leaders and organisations and this is where energy and effort should be focussed. Professional development is a key area to focus energy and organisational effort to positively influence job satisfaction. Individuals have a responsibility to themselves and to their colleagues as their behaviours and attitudes influence job satisfaction. Supporting staff and preventing burnout will have a positive effect on absenteeism, team performance and reduce the prevalence and severity of incidents. Managers and service providers should be encouraged to use existing forums, such as the National Radiotherapy Service managers and the heads of radiotherapy physics network, to discuss and share best practice and enhance learning across organisations. Sharing challenges with the national professional bodies also enables intelligence and evidence to be gained in order to enable these matters to be promoted to key national stakeholders and policy makers. It is recommended that service managers conduct regular local surveys to monitor job satisfaction levels within centres and so highlight and action any local issues to work towards improving job satisfaction levels. TABLE 3 [LEFT]: Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) human services (clinical) and general (non-clinical) showing percentage of respondents scoring low, moderate and high levels, with scoring key Free download for a limited period of 6 weeks: http://www.birpublic ations.org/doi/full/1 0.1259/bjr.20130742 1 Cooper T, Williams MV. Implementation of intensitymodulated radiotherapy: lessons learned and implications for the future. Clin Oncol 2012; 24: 539–42. ‘ MORE INFORMATION The work was published in Brit J Radiol 2014; 83: 20130742. http://dx.doi.org/10.1259/bjr.201 30742 ‘ NEWS EDITOR’S COMMENT: This work provides an excellent insight into the job satisfaction levels of the UK radiotherapy physics and therapy radiography workforce. Furthermore, the paper is full of management tips and an essential read for any service manager. It breaks down problematic areas and consequently proposes possible solutions to issues on both local and national levels. The increasing ‘intensity’ of work demand is cited as a factor in the article in reducing levels of satisfaction and creating difficulty in maintaining a good work–life balance. This is in the context of the Department of Health UK/NHS drive to greater 7-day service delivery, and advice in some regions from commissioners that new capacity developments (i.e. more linacs) will not be supported. With a growing demand for radiotherapy, these factors mean that Trusts will need to find ways to deliver increased ‘intensity’ (i.e. fractions per linac) whilst engaging with and supporting staff and investing in technologies which enable higher workflow rates. Seven-day working brings inevitable challenges for a good work–life balance so staff engagement is crucial. As an added bonus, indications so far are that key radiotherapy tariffs will be reduced substantially in 2015–16 so the flexibility for Trusts to make much needed efficiency and quality improvements will be limited. (Private communications with Professor Stuart Green, Director of Medical Physics, University Hospitals Birmingham, UK.) It is also important to note that although professional development reviews are taking place, there still appears to be a practice of getting the review completed without the required support for staff to action the approved plan. The authors highlight in this work that a structured framework comprising a personal development plan, competency framework, mentoring and planned rotations underpinned by a culture of CPD and reflective practice can benefit the workforce. They further add that the framework acknowledges the inherent link between CPD, PDRs, job satisfaction and service development. Additionally, long-term departmental strategy meetings could engage with staff at all levels. This level of involvement would allow an understanding of infrastructure and resource priorities and generally benefit all staff. With the expansion of radiotherapy services such as IMRT beyond 24 per cent, with experts1 considering an optimal level of IMRT delivery more likely to be around 50 per cent of radical patients, there needs to be further service provisions. The funding for further provisions is currently decided by both national and local commissioning groups. With further funding, there is potential scope for thousands more patients to benefit annually from advanced radiotherapy. Any comments? Email: Usman.Lula@uhb.nhs.uk SCOPE | MARCH 2015 | 09 Radiation Dose Management in Radiological Institutes – a clinical example Sebastian Schindera, M.D. Clinic of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University of Basel Hospital, Switzerland FOREWORD BY Mary Cocker Consultant Clinical Scientist, Oxford University Hospitals Radimetrics dose management system can significantly cut the time and effort required to comply with our legal obligations to optimise all processes involved in the use of medical X-rays. Dr Schindera provides some excellent clinical examples where Radimetrics assists in the management and optimisation of CT protocols; reduces dose; enhances dose awareness through alerts and action levels; and provides effective and efficient benchmarking as an aid to compliance with ‘As Low As Reasonably Practicable’. The Royal College of Radiologists 2014 Annual Scientific Meeting in London hosted the Bayer lecture: Radiation Dose Management in Radiological Institutes – a clinical example. Mary Cocker chaired the meeting and introduced internationally-renowned radiologist, Sebastian Schindera M.D. to present his experience in state-of-the-art dose management within computed tomography, with reference to data published from his work. USE OF COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY The number of computed tomography (CT) examinations has dramatically increased both in the UK and US over the past 20 years.1 Schindera attributed the increase to a combination of technical advancement, the increased rate of CT installations and the medico-legal aspect, whereby physicians may request a CT examination to exclude unlikely possibilities simply to prevent any legal ramifications. The rise in the use of CT has caused an increase in the per-capita medical exposure. Schindera presented findings from a US study which found that medical exposure due to CT examinations increased 6-fold between 1980 and 2006.2 RADIATION INDUCED CANCER The World Health Organisation (WHO) classify ionising radiation as a carcinogen, and an increasing number of published retrospective cohort studies directly attribute cancer to the use of medical X-rays.3,4 One study found that patients younger than 22 years old have a slight increase in the risk of cancer following one CT scan.4 The risk was similar to that estimated by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) who estimated the lifetime fatal cancer risk from ionising radiation to be 5% per Sievert (Sv) for the entire population, including children.5 STATUS QUO OF RADIATION PROTECTION IN CT Many effective technical advances have been introduced by CT manufacturers to improve patient safety by minimising radiation exposure, including automatic tube current and voltage modulation; iterative reconstruction; and novel, dose-efficient detectors. Similarly, radiologists have advanced practice through optimising CT protocols. Schindera posed the question: How are we doing with CT radiation protection? He suggested that the practice of CT dose protection substantially differs from the theory and that compliance may be an issue. A study that looked at the dose of CT in renal colic, which should be of a low dose due to its accuracy and use in children, found that not one institution averaged a low dose.6 Schindera concluded that the collection of comprehensive data on CT radiation doses is vital in order to overcome compliance issues and identify potential problems in radiation exposure to minimise any adverse effects. STATE OF THE ART RADIATION DOSE MANAGEMENT Schindera and his team concluded there was a need to improve processes to maximise patient safety, so looked to source suitable software that would offer both dose tracking, to provide a complete picture of the CT dose through automatic, continuous and comprehensive documentation of every CT examination; and dose benchmarking, to compare CT scanners within the same institution, other institutions or with national diagnostic reference levels. In 2013 Schindera proceeded with the installation of the RadimetricsTM system at the University of Basel Hospital (UBH). Both retrospective and prospective dose tracking were conducted by the team, focussing upon dose level and productivity management. DOSE LEVEL MANAGEMENT The team at UBH adopted a specific approach to addressing dose level management (Figure 1). The dashboard of the RadimetricsTM system (Figure 2) promptly provided users with comprehensive data showing the 20 most frequent CT protocols at the UBH; the total number of examinations per protocol in that year; and the CT Dose Index measured in CTDIvol or size-specific dose estimate (SSDE), dose length product (DLP) and effective dose calculation by the ICRP (minimum, average and maximum). Identification and collection of 20 most frequently used CT protocols Benchmark with national diagnostic reference levels Compare average dose values of different CT scanners Monitor protocol optimisation efforts Figure 1: Dose level management approach Schindera’s team compared their results with the national diagnostic reference levels, and found that CT of the head examinations were within the expected range stipulated by the national regulations. mSv to 4.7 mSv). This valuable information took only 5 minutes to obtain. The team also monitored their protocol optimisation efforts by looking at the overall average effective dose per CT scan, and they were able to reduce the effective dose (in mSv) by 32%. DOSE MANAGEMENT ON AN EXAMINATION LEVEL Figure 2: RadimetricsTM dashboard showing results from all CT of the head examinations in the year 2013 This was repeated for the 20 most frequently performed CT protocols at UBH. For CT of the chest, the data also looked at size-specific dose estimates (SSDE), taking into account the patient´s body habitus. The calculation of the effective dose is useful because it allows the radiologist to communicate the CT doses with the referring physicians rather than using CTDI, SSDE or DLP. Using RadimetricsTM, it is also possible to compare the average SSDE of different scanners. This information can be passed onto technicians to help them comply with specific recommendations that encourage younger patients to be scanned using the more doseefficient scanners. MONITORING OF PROTOCOL OPTIMISATION EFFORTS Schindera et al. conducted a study using a phantom, customised kidney 7 (Figure 3) to assess the detectability and material characterisation of renal stones with a dual-energy CT protocol at various radiation doses. The results showed that the radiation dose could be reduced by up to 57% whilst maintaining detectability and diagnostic accuracy. The research team then used the RadimetricsTM system to establish the Figure 3: Customised kidney degree by which the dose had been reduced overall. Compared to the default CT protocol, they found that the effective dose had been reduced by 45% (from 8.6 The team also looked at patient dose records and automatic alerts of dose outliers. Schindera cited an example of a patient who had received 14 CT scans within 6 months for a non-malignant disease which led to a cumulative dose of almost 270 mSv. Had the system been installed earlier, an alternative scanning technique would have been recommended. The RadimetricsTM system is able to demonstrate the effective dose for each CT scan according to the ICRP to aid compliance. The data includes the effective dose; the DLP; the SSDE; and a comparison with other patients who had the same type of CT. Schindera also presented information on installing dose alerts using RadimetricsTM whereby specific thresholds can be applied to protocols, and also to specific patients’ cumulative dose, with a notification email being sent to the radiologist and technician if the dose has been exceeded. MANAGEMENT OF PRODUCTIVITY The RadimetricsTM system provides easy access to the number and types of CT scans performed by each scanner within a specified time frame. (Figure 4) Scanner B Scanner A Scanner C Scanner D Productivity of scanners in 12 months Productivity by day within one month Figure 4: Productivity of four CT scanners at University Hospital Basel CONCLUSION Schindera concluded that comprehensive radiation dose tracking has been widely neglected. Dose tracking and dose benchmarking are the two major components of radiation dose management which will play an important role in ensuring patient safety through greater compliance of radiation protection within CT in the near future. Due to the large amount of data that needs to be collected, a software solution is preferable for systematic and comprehensive radiation dose management. To arrange an evaluation of your current approach to radiation dose management or to receive further information, please email: radimetrics.uk@bayer.com or telephone: 01635 563480. The symposium and this article were both initiated and funded by Bayer HealthCare. REFERENCES 1. Hall EJ, et al. Cancer risks from diagnostic radiology. Br J Radiol. 2008;81(965):362-378. 2. Mettler FA, et al. Radiologic and Nuclear Medicine Studies in the United States and Worldwide: Frequency, radiation dose and comparison with other radiation sources - 1950-2007. Radiology. 2009;253(2). 3. Mathews J, et al. Cancer risk in 680 000 people exposed to computed tomography scans in childhood or adolescence: data linkage study of 11 million Australians. British Medical Journal. 2013;346:2360. 4. Pearce MS, et al. Radiation exposure from CT scans in childhood and subsequent risk of leukaemia and brain tumours: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet. 2012;380:499-505. 5. International Commission on Radiological Protection website http://www.icrp.org/docs/rad_for_gp_for_web.pdf (accessed 14 October 2014). 6. Lukasiewicz MS, et al. Radiation dose index of renal colic protocol CT studies in the United States: A report from the American College of Radiology National Data Registry. 2014;271(2). 7. Pansini M & Schindera S, et al. Low-dose dual-source dual-energy CT for urolithiasis: feasibility study. European Society of Urogenital Radiology 2013 (poster presentation). L.GB.10.2014.8585 January 2015 JOURNAL CLUB NEWS BY USMAN I. LULA AND RICHARD AMOS Small-field tissue phantom ratio data generation methods: a comparison RADIOTHERAPY PHYSICS Tissue-phantom ratios (TPRs) are a common dosimetric quantity used to describe the change in dose with isocentric depth in tissue with megavoltage photon treatments. Published linear accelerator data for field sizes of 4 × 4 cm2 and greater are widely available and often used as a reference data check for data determined within an individual radiotherapy department. These data are usually tabulated as a function of depth and field size at the isocentre for a given beam quality index (TPR20/10 ratio). Stereotactic and intensitymodulated treatments require data for field sizes smaller than 4 cm2. TPR can be challenging and time consuming to measure. The conversion of percentage depth dose (PDD) data using standard formulae (developed by Dutreix et al.) is widely employed as an alternative method to generating TPR (also see table B.1 in BJR S17, 1983). However, the applicability of these formulae for small fields has been called into question in the literature. Guidance in the IPEM Report 103 on Small Field Dosimetry does not recommend the use of ‘ MORE INFORMATION The work was published in Med Dosim 2014; 39: 60–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.me ddos.2013.09.008 ‘ NEWS EDITOR’S COMMENT: This work provides valuable information about the validity of extrapolated TPR data and the use of standard formulae for small-field dose calculations.It can prove useful to those intending to measure or use PDD- 12 | MARCH 2015 | SCOPE standard formulae for TPR calculation from PDD. Functional representation has been proposed for small-field TPR production. This work compared measured TPR data for small 6 MV photon fields against that generated by conversion of PDD using standard formulae to assess the efficacy of the conversion data. By functionally fitting the measured TPR data for square fields greater than 4 cm in length, the TPR curves for smaller fields are generated and compared with measurements. TPRs and PDDs were measured in a water tank for a range of square field sizes. The source to detector distance was set to a constant 100 cm and the water level was softwarecontrolled by means of a water gauge fitted to the detector’s support arm. Data were measured using a parallel plate microchamber aligned to the central axis of the beam. Each TPR dataset was normalised at a depth of 10 cm in water. The PDDs were converted to TPRs using standard formulae. TPRs for fields of 4 × 4 cm2 and larger were used to create functional fits. The parameterisation coefficients were used to construct extrapolated TPR curves for 1 × 1 cm2, 2 × 2 cm2 and 3 × 3 cm2 fields. The TPR data generated using standard formulae were in excellent agreement with direct TPR measurements. The TPR data for 1 × 1 cm2, 2 × 2 cm2 and 3 × 3 cm2 fields created by extrapolation of the larger field functional fits gave inaccurate results. The corresponding mean differences for the three fields were 4.0 per cent, 2.0 per cent and 0.9 per cent with maximum differences between generated and measured TPRs of 12.0 per cent, 5.3 per cent and 2.0 per cent. Generation of TPR data using a standard PDDconversion methodology has been shown to give good agreement with our directly measured data for small fields. It would be suitable for clinical use in independent monitor unit check calculations. However, extrapolation of TPR data using the functional fits to fields of 4 × 4 cm2 or larger resulted in generation of TPR curves that did not compare well with the measured data. Specifically, the dose just beyond the buildup region and dose falloff with depth beyond 10 cm was overestimated. Therefore, this method of data generation could not be recommended. converted TPR data for small fields. As a note, the authors highlight that functional fitting is an extremely useful tool for smoothing measured data and producing TPR data for intermediate field sizes and depths not measured. With TPR data, there is no divergence or distance dependence though there is dependence on depth, energy and shape and size of the field (Sibtain A, Morgan A, MacDougal N. Physics for Clinical Oncology. OUP, 2012: 100–101). Independent MU calculations using TPR data are thus easier to perform for isocentric treatments as it avoids the application of the Mayneord F factor to correct for changes to the focus-to-skin distance. If you have a comment on this news article, or would like to share your experiences with the medical physics community, then please get in touch with me via email: Usman.Lula@uhb.nhs.uk n TUBERCULOSIS DRUGS PET/CT imaging of the lungs can reveal whether a drug can treat tuberculosis, according to a study. The challenge is to find more effective treatments that work in a shorter time period, but the standard preclinical models for testing new drugs have occasionally led to contradictory results when they are evaluated in human trials (Sci Transl Med 6: 265ra167). n PHOTOACOUSTICS Researchers have shown the potential of photoacoustic imaging as a rapid non-invasive method for detecting and staging cervical cancer with high accuracy. Photoacoustic imaging can detect regions of abnormal angiogenesis due to their high haemoglobin concentration, which causes such regions to exhibit higher optical absorption than normal tissues at certain wavelengths. (Biomed Opt Express 6: 135). n TEN-YEAR DATA Cleveland Clinic researchers have reported on 10 years of experience using stereotactic body radiotherapy to treat medically inoperable early-stage lung cancer patients. At 5 years post-treatment, overall survival was 18.3 per cent and 20.3 per cent for patients with central and non-central tumours, respectively (Chicago Multidisciplinary Symposium in Thoracic Oncology, 2014). n COGNITIVE DECLINE Arterial spin labelling, an MRI technique that measures brain perfusion without requiring contrast agent injection, can detect signs of cognitive decline even before symptoms appear. The technique has the potential to serve as a biomarker in very early diagnosis of preclinical dementia (Radiology doi: 10.1148/radiol.14140680). JOURNAL CLUB NEWS BY USMAN I. LULA AND RICHARD AMOS Figure 1: Measured and generated tissue-phantom ratio data from conversion of percentage depth doses using the equation of Dutreix et al. Measured data are shown as symbols and generated data as lines. Figure kindly supplied by Neil Richmond MSc, Medical Physics Department, James Cook University Hospital, Middlesbrough TS4 3BW, UK. © Elsevier 2014. Richmond N, Brackenridge R. A comparison of small field tissue phantom ratio data generation methods for an Elekta Agility 6 MV photon beam. Med Dosim 2014; 39: 60–63 Figure 2: Measured and generated tissue-phantom ratio data created by functional fitting of measured values for field sizes 20 × 20 cm2 to 4 × 4 cm2. The coefficients of the functional fits were extrapolated to smaller field sizes to create 3 × 3 cm2, 2 × 2 cm2 and 1 × 1 cm2 TPR curves. Measured data are shown as symbols and functionality fit data as lines. Figure kindly supplied by Neil Richmond MSc, Medical Physics Department, James Cook University Hospital, Middlesbrough TS4 3BW, UK. © Elsevier 2014. Richmond N, Brackenridge R. A comparison of small field tissue phantom ratio data generation methods for an Elekta Agility 6 MV photon beam. Med Dosim 2014; 39: 60–63 SCOPE | MARCH 2015 | 13 Quality measure? ISO 15189 with peer review and accreditation ISO 9001 certificated + peer review ISO 14971 certificated ISO 9001 certificated No system – do your best Quality management systems Benchmarking service quality: accreditation or certification? Edwin Claridge (University Hospitals Birmingham) explains how new quality management systems have evolved and what issues they bring his article was stimulated by discussions about new quality management systems (QMS) for MP&CE services, noting the work in hand in the AHCS/IPEM1 project. My intention is to present a personal review of the development of UK healthcare science quality systems and to explain my understanding of the newer initiatives, so putting them into perspective. There are several important issues for IPEM. One concerns the means by which assessment of the overall competence of services can be judged. This is complicated through the use of the terms ‘certification’ and ‘accreditation’, applied to the formal recognition of QMS. Another is to consider whether the scope of QMS is best applied to service provision across managerial boundaries, which I will call ‘horizontal’ systems, or best applied to more limited and defined sections of activity, or ‘vertical’ systems. The fact that some areas of MP&CE have no QMS and others have well-established systems raises additional problems. It is important that these issues and their implications are T COVER IMAGE: How do we assess quality and how will new healthcare systems fit? 14 | MARCH 2015 | SCOPE understood when considering, designing and introducing new systems. Some 15 years ago there was much activity within the oncology community concerning QMS, largely stimulated by the Bleehen report2 that called for radiotherapy services to have such systems. The requirement was commonly met through the use of the ISO 9000:1998 family of standards. The application of the standards and the scope of the systems were defined locally, so it was possible to embrace an oncology service, covering radiotherapy, chemotherapy and the radiotherapy physics branch of a medical physics service. This could happen even if medical physics was managed separately from the clinical services. It was also possible to include ‘constructive’ activities such as treatment planning and clinical decision making. These QMS can be described as ‘horizontal’. The systems are certified by organisations such as BSI that, in turn, are accredited by the United Kingdom Accreditation Service (UKAS). UKAS is recognised and monitored both internationally and by the SERVICE QUALITY FEATURE government as the focus for UK accreditation work, defined as ‘the procedure by which an authoritative body gives formal recognition that an aspirant body or person is competent to carry out specific tasks’. The ISO 9000 approach was sometimes criticised as simply validating the fact that ‘what was said to be done was actually done’, with no regard to quality. However, by adopting a positive attitude, it is clearly possible to include features that embrace quality. For example, the procedures for the use of the National Physical Laboratory primary standards and regional secondary standards for dosimetry, local training practices, local competency requirements, CPD records and feedback monitoring can all be included. The regular ISO system external audit arrangements check that procedures are being followed. Further checks through interdepartmental audit, external clinical peer review and external clinical trials audits can be also be referenced in the procedures and contribute to an assessment of competence. ISO 9001:2008 systems, in use within oncology, have come to be regarded as worthwhile. With the further checks described they can certainly be argued to confirm competence. ISO 9001:2008 systems have been adopted in other areas of MP&CE, notably clinical engineering and radiation protection. The world of international standards evolves slowly but the ISO approach to quality and risk management is alive, well and dealing with current issues relevant to MP&CE. Appendix 1 indicates part of the range of international standards and technical reports that involve MP&CE activity. These documents are frequently used in defining and demonstrating the ‘good practice’ needed to meet the requirements of the EU Medical Device Directive (MDD). Together with the ionising radiation documentation, these developments help us maintain our links with the wider scientific world. The MDD is currently subject to consultation3 and when relaunched as the Medical Device Regulations may require appropriate QMS compliance for elements of MP&CE. This topic perhaps deserves another article. Moving beyond ISO 9001:2008 I have indicated that constructive use of the ISO 9001:2008 quality standard can go far beyond a simplistic and somewhat meaningless compliance. However, over the years, a requirement for something more than ISO 9000 has been recognised. Consider the production of vacuum cleaners. Retailers offer many models. We expect them all to be CE marked and manufactured within an appropriate ISO certified system. However, there are consumer advice labs which test the products and produce league tables and ‘best buy’ suggestions to provide additional help to the consumer. Such quantification of ‘product’ characteristics stimulated developments going beyond the ISO 9000 certification concept. Perhaps the first example was ISO/IEC 17025:1999, ‘General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories’. Current ISO 17025:2005 systems embrace ISO 9000 requirements and the scheme works well because it is relatively easy to subject laboratories to both technical audits and test measurement schemes. The audit/assessment processes for ISO 9001:2008 and ISO/IEC 17025:2005 are quite different. For ISO 9001:2008 systems, certification is defined as ‘written assurance by a third party that a product, process or service conforms to or complies with specified requirements’. The external auditing and certification of QMS is performed, using generalist auditors, by a UKAS accredited company. For ISO 17025:2005 the work is done directly by UKAS and it involves technical experts. The laboratory is accredited, not certificated. A similar concept was adopted in 1992 when Clinical Pathology Accreditation (UK) Ltd, or CPA, was formed to compare and ensure standardisation of the output of clinical laboratories and grant accreditation. Initial planning for the scheme involved labs from Australia, Canada and the UK. This was an example of the use of the term ‘accreditation’, outside the aegis of UKAS. CPA continued to be involved in international collaboration and the work eventually led to the publication of ISO 15189:2003, ‘Medical laboratories – particular requirements for quality and competence’. In 2009 CPA was acquired by UKAS. CPA continued its international collaboration and a revised standard document, ISO 15189:2012, has been published that embodies the requirements of ISO 9001:2008. Medical laboratories are now in a well-organised evolution from accreditation through CPA to accreditation with ISO 15189:2012, through UKAS. A further complication is that UKAS is not the sole body offering QMS accreditation in the UK. Other organisations, accredited with UCAS, can offer certification of ISO 9001:2008 systems and supplement this by granting accreditation using their own standards, which have been approved by the International Society for Quality in Health Care (ISQua).4 Further developments in UK healthcare science So far I have considered the two long-established QMSs in healthcare science: the medical laboratories’ ISO 15189 approach, with UKAS accreditation, and the MP&CE departments using ISO 9001 certified systems, often referencing and augmented by peer review, etc. In recent years an alternative approach to QMS has emerged. In both Europe and America similar initiatives have been developed. In 2009 the Imaging Services Accreditation Scheme (ISAS)5 was introduced in the UK. It was developed by the Royal College of Radiologists (RCR) and the College of Radiographers (CoR) with Department of Health (DoH) support. It uses UKAS as the accreditation body and assessor teams involving technical experts, RCR clinical experts and a lay person. It combines self-assessment with separate external assessment/peer review visits. Assessment is conducted against ISAS published standards and criteria. The applicant department defines the scope. In November 2014 only 18 services were listed as accredited. To gain insight into the work involved and to access a larger bibliography on health sector accreditation see Hiorns.6 A similar scheme, closely modelled on ISAS, called Improving Quality in Physiological Services (IQIPS),7 was launched with pilots in 2011. The IQIPS accreditation framework was developed to improve, promote and recognise good-quality practice across eight physiological disciplines. In November 2014 there are 22 listed ‰ ‘ FEEDBACK Scope welcomes your feedback! @IPEMScope SCOPE | MARCH 2015 | 15 SERVICE QUALITY FEATURE ‰ accredited services. Accreditation is awarded by ‘ Edwin Claridge was a Consultant Clinical Scientist based at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital, UHB NHS Foundation Trust,Birmingham, UK UKAS under a contract with the Royal College of Physicians (RCP). Both ISAS and IQIPS are available to NHS and private providers. The common model used in the ISAS and IQIPS schemes involves firstly a list of domains, then a list of standards. Each standard then acquires a list of criteria. These documents are published and available online. After departments enrol they gain access to a selfassessment and improvement tool (SAIT) and a knowledge management system (KMS). Departments establish documentation to indicate that they satisfy the criteria and undertake self-assessment against the criteria. Progress is logged electronically with the scheme’s central office. When reasonably confident, departments apply for accreditation – if the remote assessment is considered satisfactory then a formal assessment visit takes place and accreditation can be granted. Thereafter annual web-based self-assessment follows. Formal visits occur every two years for ISAS and every four years for IQIPS. ISAS and IQIPS have no formal connection with ISO 9001 but the criteria clearly share many common themes. Attention to the importance of quality management in healthcare science was highlighted in November 2013 by Professor Sir Mike Richards CBE, who stated that ‘accreditation and peer review already play an important role in quality improvement in areas such as mental health, diagnostics and cancer and I strongly believe that such schemes have a key role to play in the future of hospital inspection’. Soon after that the AHCS/ IPEM project was launched, to design an accreditation system for MP&CE. The project is currently called Improving Quality in Clinical Engineering and Physical Science Services (iCEPSS).1 This title seems somewhat pejorative; would not CEPSSAS or CEMPAS be better, following the ISAS precedent? iCEPSS documentation indicates that existing QMS systems need to be recognised and accommodated. This is easier said than done, because most are certified, rather than accredited, meaning that different auditing bodies, contracts and philosophies are involved. The consultation on standards and criteria, produced by the AHCS/IPEM project group and in progress at the time of writing in early November 2014,8 clearly concentrates solely on a new system. It did not seem to stimulate much lively conversation in MP&CE common rooms but the underlying issues are of considerable importance. The proposal involves a top level generic scheme with five domains: n patient and service user experience – five standards, 27 criteria; n management, facilities and resources – 11 standards, 34 criteria; n workforce and training – six standards, 46 criteria; n safety and risk management – six standards, 37 criteria, and n clinical scientific service – six standards, 38 criteria. Departmental arrangements are so different that it is unlikely that all departments will find all the criteria relevant but this problem will already have been faced within IQIPS. 16 | MARCH 2015 | SCOPE Options for MP&CE: comparing the old and the new The scope of the ISO 9001:2008 systems can easily be defined to cover clinical services, as described in the introduction above. A major benefit of ISO 9001 is that it does not impose a ‘vertical ’implementation. We can argue that there are greater benefits for an oncology service (which includes radiotherapy) to use a ‘horizontal’ ISO 9001 system than for the radiotherapy physics service to have its own separate ‘vertical’ iCEPSS system. This is because the ‘horizontal’ system helps to formalise relationships and handovers between clinicians, radiographers, clinical scientists and practitioners, IT staff and company supplier staff. Another significant feature of ISO 9001 is that the external auditors for the core system are ‘generalists’ or ‘laymen’ and they visit frequently. With separately organised peer review and intercomparisons, having services monitored in this way is surely reassuring for the public at large. The ISAS and IQIPS systems use a ‘vertical’ approach. IQIPS covers eight disciplines: audiology, cardiac physiology, gastrointestinal physiology, neurophysiology, ophthalmic and vision science, respiratory and sleep physiology, urodynamics and vascular science. ISAS includes, for example, radiography, mammography, ultrasound and MRI in the list of accreditable activities. If iCEPSS also uses this approach it is faced with the challenge of dividing MP&CE activities into a workable range of ‘vertical’ topics. This is likely to expose overlaps with ISAS and IQIPS. There is also, of course, ‘horizontal’ sharing within MP&CE, e.g. clinical computing, clinical measurement, electronic and mechanical workshops, therapeutic nuclear medicine and radiation protection. Do vertical systems cover relationships with all colleagues as well as ‘horizontal’ ones? Overall competence is really only assessed through the analysis of output. In healthcare this can involve clinical assessment of diagnosis and of treatments, sometimes involving a long period of time. In oncology this has already been recognised and we have clinical peer review, interdepartmental dosimetry audits and various audits associated with national and international clinical trials. These complement the frequent external audits required with ISO 9001:2008 systems and which are conducted by generalist auditors from the certifying company. It seems that within ISAS and IQIPS this generalist auditing is replaced by self-assessment partly monitored through electronic submissions to a central office. The external audit visits are less frequent and incorporate peer review assessments that are integral to the QMS. Building peer review into a UKAS QMS for healthcare science service groups usually requires UKAS to associate with a partner able to provide appropriate potential auditors. With ISO 15189 this was achieved early, when UKAS acquired CPA. For ISAS the natural partners were the RCR and the CoR. The Royal College of Physicians runs the accreditation office for IQIPS and contracts assessment work to UKAS. A new iCEPSS scheme will need an appropriate partner – should IPEM take this on? Blue Phantom om2 and OmniPro-Accept are IBA Dosime Dosimetry GmbH products. OSL is the exclusive distributor in the UK & Ireland 2 Blue Phantom with OmniPro-Accept Fastest. Most Accurate. Most reliable. Quick setup and accurate measurements Absolute and contactless positioning system Intuitive workflow-optimised software Instant acquisition of beam profiles with 99 channel detector array Increased efficiency & reduced QA time of the linac and commissioning time of the RTPS ww www.osl.uk.com w.osl.uk.com enquiry@osl.uk.com +44 (0)1743 462694 SCOPE | MARCH 2015 | 17 SERVICE QUALITY FEATURE ‰ Developing and managing QMS Those who already have QMS will know that the staff input needed in their development is considerable and after systems are established it continues to be significant. Paper-based systems exist but many systems benefit from QMS organisational software that makes logging events, controlling documents and flagging actions more practical. Whilst iCEPSS would require a central agency with online systems for collecting reports, it seems unlikely that this will remove the need for local QMS management software. There may even be a need to create middleware to link the two. As well as possible local software systems, the ISAS/ IQIPS model requires a central back office which deals with enrolment, payments, online services, advice services and links with UKAS. This office will build up a centralised information resource within the subject areas and that is not supplied through individual ISO 9001:2008 system certification bodies. Conclusions First let us look at the semantics. The distinction between the terms ‘certification’ and ‘accreditation’, used in the context of QMS assessment, is actually quite fuzzy. The term ‘accreditation’ means different things to different people and even in the world of healthcare QMS it is not unique to UKAS. The core issue is that our masters want further assurance of our competence and appear to favour UKAS accreditation as the method through which it can be achieved. The evidence from the timescales outlined above suggests that creating new and effective QMS takes a long time and that systems based on ISO standards work well. Beyond ISO 9001:2008, both ISO 17025:2005 and ISO 15189:2012 assess competence mainly through quantitative means. What is more difficult is to determine how to assess competence with regard to clinical outcomes. It is a pity that the AHCS/IPEM project consultation concentrates on fine detail without setting out explanations and options. Hopefully members will have made good use of the free text opportunity! Incidentally, good examples of consultation come from the Law Commission9 and the MHRA.3 DoH asked IPEM to join ACHS in this work because of its wide-ranging MP&CE involvement. Additionally, within IPEM, there is access to much MP&CE experience of ISO 9001:2008, together with an understanding of risk assessment, option appraisal, project management and business case planning. These strengths need to be brought to bear on the problems. The AHCS/IPEM project is encouraged to quickly produce a new accreditation system. Whilst that would be helpful to the Care Quality Commission (CQC), the material presented here suggests that the process is not usually quick. Clearly departments or sections of departments without quality systems could benefit from having them but at this stage iCEPSS seems to place too much confidence in a model that is not well understood within a MP&CE context and has a limited NHS pedigree. A particular challenge is to consider the best way to conduct assessment of service competence in MP&CE areas, or the service areas they support. Perhaps there is scope for an evolutionary approach using both ISO 18 | MARCH 2015 | SCOPE 9001:2008 systems and new iCEPSS systems? Services with good QMS would avoid dramatic change and still satisfy review requirements. In the much longer term migration to an extended ISO system, parallel with ISO 15189, might be possible. An evolutionary approach would follow the lead from Simon Stephens and the NHS ’Five Year Forward View’,10 which suggests, in a different context, that we should question whether a ‘one size fits all’ approach is best. It is possible that ISO 9001:2008 ‘horizontal’ systems with appropriate peer review and intercomparisons are best in some circumstances and iCEPSS ‘vertical’ systems will fit other needs. In both cases funded peer review and scheme support is needed. In the new systems peer review is built into the accreditation model but core activity is monitored mainly by self-assessment. In certified systems core activity monitoring is probably more robust and peer review is arranged separately. Perhaps the key question is to ask whether peer review is best organised within or alongside QMS? One of the IPEM core objectives is to promote the interests of MP&CE for the benefit of the community at large. To encourage more departments to use QMS is clearly in line with this objective. Would it be best served by seeking an evolutionary approach to the wider use of QMS? This approach might deal better with interscheme overlaps and potential unforeseen consequences. Peter Jarritt, the iCEPSS Project Lead, and his team have a difficult job to do. I hope that this article will encourage IPEM members to engage with the team and contribute to further discussions. n ‘ APPENDIX 1. THE SCOPE OF ISO STANDARDS IN HEALTHCARE SCIENCE The documents listed here indicate that there are many important MP&CE-related issues now covered by ISO/IEC standards and technical reports. The list is not inclusive and does not cover ionising radiation material. MP&CE must continue to be aware of these and similar documents in planning its QMS developments. n The next revision of ISO9001 is due in 2015. n ISO/IEC 27000:2014 Information technology – Security techniques – Information security management systems – Overview and vocabulary. n ISO 27799:2008 Health informatics – Information security management in health using ISO/IEC 27002. n ISO 15189:2012 Medical laboratories – Requirements for quality and competence. n ISO 60601-1:2006 + Amendment 1:2013 Medical electrical equipment. General requirements for basic safety and essential performance (harmonised with the MDD). n ISO 13485:2003 Medical devices – Quality management systems – Requirements for regulatory purposes. n ISO 14971:2007 Medical devices – Application of risk management to medical devices. n ISO/IEC 90003:2004 Software engineering – Guidelines for the application of ISO 9001:2000 to computer software. n IEC/TR 80002-1:2009 Medical device software – Part 1: Guidance on the application of ISO 14971 to medical device software. n IEC 62304:2006 Medical device software – Software life cycle processes. n IEC 80001-1:2010 Application of risk management for ITnetworks incorporating medical devices – Part 1: Roles, responsibilities and activities. This document is the first in a series of eight that deal with the relationship between hospital IT departments and medical device users in organising the sharing of networks. This is of considerable relevance to MP&CE services. Wireless networks are included and advice to hospitals on the implementation of the standard is to be provided. SONOGRAPHIC EDUCATION FEATURE REFERENCES Hyperlinks checked in November 2014 1 AHCS. iCEPSS project leaflet, 2014. http://www.ahcs.ac.uk/wordpress/wpcontent/u ploads/2014/06/iCEPSS-A4-leaflet.pdf 2 Bleehen NM. Quality Assurance in Radiotherapy. Report of Standing Sub-committee on Cancer. London: Department of Health, 1991. 3 MHRA. Changes to the Medical Device Directive. http://www.mhra.gov.uk/Howweregulate/Device s/Legislation/NewLegislationonMedicalDevices 4 The International Society for Quality in Healthcare. http://www.isqua.org 5 ISAS. Imaging Services Accreditation Scheme. https://www.isasuk.org/Library/Preapplication_ Page/ISAS%20Preparation%20Leaflet%20Med% 20res.pdf 6 Hiorns M. Radiology Accreditation in the UK: the Theory and the Reality. http://www.isasuk.org/Library/Radiology%20in%20the%20UK%20 2011.pdf 7 Improving Quality in Physiological Services. https://www.iqips.org.uk 8 AHCS. The iCEPSS consultation. http://www.ahcs.ac.uk/2014/08/icepssconsultation-launched-have-your-say-in-shapingstandards-criteria-anddomains/?utm_source=VoxAug14 9 Law Commission. Regulation of Health and Social Care Professionals. http://lawcommission.justice.gov.uk/areas/Health care_professions.htm 10 NHS England. Five Year Forward View, October 2014. http://www.england.nhs.uk/wpcontent/uploads/20 14/10/5yfv-web.pdf Delivering sonographic education and training Sally Hawking (CASE Co-ordinator) describes the consortium that promotes best ultrasound practice U ltrasound is something the public are very acquainted with – who hasn’t seen the black-and-white image of an unborn baby in the womb? But its use in healthcare stretches far beyond obstetrics and its application crosses many areas of medical physics, and so it is right that this is a field in which IPEM should be involved. This article explains how IPEM is helping to promote better standards in ultrasound education, through an innovative and successful accreditation partnership known as CASE. If you read the list of IPEM objectives you will see that the top two are ‘Ensure and improve the quality, safety and effectiveness of science and technology in healthcare’ and ‘Maintain high standards of professional development for healthcare scientists, engineers and technicians’. Just one of the ways IPEM is meeting these objectives is by being a key member of the Consortium for the Accreditation of Sonographic Education, otherwise known as CASE. The consortium is made up of five member organisations, the others being the Society and College of Radiographers (SCoR), the British Medical Ultrasound Society (BMUS), the British Society of Echocardiography (BSE) and the Society for Vascular Technology of Great Britain and Ireland (SVT). CASE was established in 1993 with a common purpose to ensure that the education and training of sonographers in the UK is delivered at the highest level. Promoting best ultrasound practice CASE has been on something of a journey in the past 22 years as both people and technology have changed. The arrival of high street sonography, the rise of short, focussed courses and the encouragement of non-NHS service providers have all had an impact on sonography education and practice. In spite of this, CASE has recently been enjoying a period of growth and success as its reputation extends to higher education institutions and to students, both in the UK and abroad. CASE is governed by its member organisations, and whilst they are each unique in their purpose and commitments to their members, they are brought together to provide a forum for exchanging ideas, ‰ ‘ FEEDBACK Scope welcomes your feedback! @IPEMScope SCOPE | MARCH 2015 | 19 SONOGRAPHIC EDUCATION FEATURE ‰ sharing views and providing the governance, strategic aims and financial decisions. A committee, made up of two representatives from each of the member organisations and supported by the CASE co-ordinator, manages the actual accreditation process alongside other fundamental tasks. The day-to-day activities include approving new accreditor applications, organising study days, producing a newsletter and maintaining data. For both groups, it is key to consider the advances in clinical procedures and in academic methods and reach conclusions on how CASE should respond. It is vital to everyone involved that the standards of service provision and education are developed in parallel with increasing demand and improving technology. CASE’s philosophy has always been to promote best ultrasound practice through the accreditation of postgraduate training programmes that develop safe and competent ultrasound practitioners. At its heart is a team of 31 volunteer accreditors who ensure that the programmes being run from currently 17 of the UK’s universities meet the exacting standards that CASE has set. The accreditors themselves come from a mix of both academic and clinical backgrounds, some are universitybased whilst others are hospital-based, but many have experience in both areas. Their skills cover a wide range of ultrasound applications including gynaecology, vascular, musculoskeletal, cardiac and emergency medicine. The accreditation process ‘ MORE INFO To volunteer as a CASE accreditor, or for further details, see www.case-uk.org Course leaders of MSc programmes and postgraduate level focussed courses are required to apply to CASE for accreditation, after which a team of accreditors will be assigned to review and appraise every aspect of the programme or course from documentation through clinical assessment and staff competency to student experience. A key element of the process is the feedback that the accreditors give to the universities where, alongside commendations and recommendations for change, conditions can be applied which the university must meet within a given timeframe in order to achieve accreditation. A comprehensive annual performance monitoring review (APMR) is carried out at the end of each academic year and provides the APMR subgroup with the opportunity to check on the courses being run and to see if any adverse issues arise between official CASE accreditation visits to further safeguard standards. Of the applications CASE receives for accreditation, the main area to see recent growth is the delivery of focussed courses that meet a need for training in a specialist area of ultrasound application, whether that is a niche skill or a subject matter that is profession-specific. For such courses to be successful at accreditation it is important that they match up to the same clinical practice standards as a full programme would. The very fact that these courses are growing in popularity, however, reflects the 20 | MARCH 2015 | SCOPE changing environment from an academic and service perspective and how individuals go about advancing their own career. There have also been a number of recent approaches to CASE to request accreditation from other providers of education, such as private training companies or manufacturers. Whilst CASE is willing to accredit these courses, the key requirement remains that the clinical competencies are the equivalent of an ‘Mlevel’ course, albeit in a smaller, defined area of practice. Plans for the future include encouraging the Royal College of Midwives to return to the consortium, as midwives are seen as a highly valuable and important group that needs to be represented; persuading the few remaining unaccredited courses to apply for CASE accreditation, and developing a strategic plan for the consortium that will ensure it can continue its essential work into the future. Through its involvement and influence with CASE, IPEM is achieving its aim to ensure high standards for the benefit of the public when it comes to sonographic training. It is maintaining the Institute’s traditional role in setting and maintaining standards which protect the public, whilst being flexible and innovative in response to a changing environment. For the IPEM members involved with CASE, both as accreditors and committee members, the role is an interesting and rewarding one. Gill Dolbear, CASE Chair, November 2014: ‘The main aim of CASE has always been to protect the public by ensuring consistently high levels of ultrasound education and training throughout the UK. Alongside this, CASE has strived to encourage creativity in the design and delivery of ultrasound programmes and courses, whilst at the same time ensuring the quality and consistency of the student experience. The current sonography workforce crisis is driving the need for further innovation and, over the next few years, we will see a new and exciting ultrasound education and training landscape emerge as “new style” courses are developed and delivered. The challenge presented to CASE is, therefore, to make the best use of the extensive knowledge and experience of its accreditors to guide HEIs through this period of change to a successful outcome.’ n Person-centred care: health technology management John Amoore (NHS Ayrshire and Arran) and Patricia Brooks Young (Edinburgh Napier University/NHS Lothian) ‘ erson-centred care’ has become a new slogan in contemporary healthcare, with hospitals, Trusts and other organisations adopting strategies to support a greater focus on service users, including patient representatives on Boards and committees. But surely all healthcare is focussed on patients? What does person-centred care actually mean? The answer lies in viewing the process of care from the patient and carer perspective. Person-centred care is then defined by service users as ‘planned with people who work together to understand me and my carer(s), put me in control, co-ordinate and deliver services to achieve my best outcome’.1 P Within rehabilitation engineering and other disciplines of medical physics and engineering whose work routinely involves direct patient and carer contact, the importance of person-centred care is not difficult to appreciate. Designing or adapting mobility aids for an individual patient and their carer is inherently person-centred. But does a person-centred approach have relevance for health technology management (HTM), the technical details of which can often seem remote from patients and carers? The objective of medical devices and HTM goes beyond functional technology, to the outcomes and experience for the patients and carers whom the technology supports. This objective must not be lost as HTM practitioners concentrate on the necessary technical details. ‰ ‘ FEEDBACK Scope welcomes your feedback! @IPEMScope MobiusFX MobiusFX The one minute IMRT/VMA IMRT/VMAT /VMA AT QA solut solution Know delivered doses to your targets and critical structures meet clinical objectives. MobiusFX utilises Mobius3D’s advanced collapsed cone algorithm, the machine log files, and the patient’s CT to determine extremely accurate 3D dose. Save time and effort and reclaim your nights and weekends. Since there is no array, EPID or film to set up, QA can easily be completed during normal working hours. Don’t guess why errors exist; learn how to fix them. MobiusFX separates individual effects of calculation, data transfer, and delivery errors so you can investigate the differential causes and effectively modify them. ww www.osl.uk.com w.osl.uk.com enquiry@osl.uk.com +44 (0)1743 462694 SCOPE | MARCH 2015 | 21 PERSON-CENTRED CARE FEATURE ‰ t FIGURE 1. Engineering is built on pillars of people, money and technology, an understanding of which is particularly appropriate for engineering applied to healthcare whose focus is the people involved, in particular the patients and their carers, professional and lay Medical devices are not used in isolation. The interactions between technology, patients and their carers (professional and lay) should be understood by the clinical engineer solving medical device problems. Focussing solely on the technicalities of medical devices and their management is not sufficient to meet contemporary healthcare demands and national quality standards. White and King emphasised this when discussing the selection of enteral feeding pumps: ‘The accuracy and safety of feeding pumps are, however, only a part of enteral pump system evaluation. Assessment … is also required from patients and their care givers’.2 Engineering is not simply about the technical details of equipment, but is built on the pillars of ‘people’, ‘finance’ and technology (figure 1). This is particularly true for health technology management where people (patients and caregivers) are at the heart of the process, the ‘keystone’ that holds the process together.3 If person-centred HTM is appropriate, what does this mean in practice? The ECRI Institute, reflecting on the transformation of healthcare from a ‘provider-based model to one that recognises and incorporates the individual patient’s needs and values’ questioned how to ‘transform the concept from an amorphous ideal into a clearly attainable goal’, suggesting the need to define the ‘elements that are characteristic of patient-centered care’.4 Transformation from equipment focus to person focus FIGURE 2. Equipment-focussed health technology management Traditional equipment management focussed on the devices whilst acknowledging relationships between medical devices, healthcare team, the patient and supporting infrastructure (figure 2). Technical details are vitally important, ensuring careful selection followed by maintenance to ensure efficacy and safety during the equipment’s operational life. Equally, the necessary technical attention should consider and not obscure patient and carer requirements. Hence, personcentred equipment management transforms the focus from the medical devices (figure 2) to include the patient and carer (figure 3). Recognising the need for this transformation is only the first step, however; how to turn this into a practical reality is a key consideration. One approach is to review, from a patient–carer perspective, the individual elements of the traditional HTM pathway starting from identification of need, through selection, procurement and management during operational use to final disposal (table 1). Transforming the ‘amorphous ideal into a clearly attainable goal’4 requires analysing each element, identifying how each should be developed to better support patient and carer needs. The transformation does not neglect the technical requirements, but adds the complementary person-centred dimension. t Identifying the person-centred dimensions of the HTM pathway FIGURE 3. Patient- and carer-focussed health technology management t 22 | MARCH 2015 | SCOPE Table 1 summarises the HTM pathway with its three phases: acquisition, operational and disposal. Incorporating the person-centred (PC) approach involves looking at each phase from the perspective of patient and carer. The first phase, the acquisition of medical devices, begins with the identification of need, from which the clinical and technical specifications follow. These specifications provide the basis for evaluating the technologies available to enable PERSON-CENTRED CARE FEATURE selection of the optimum device meeting the clinical, technical and financial criteria. The MHRA, in its 2014 revised guidelines on ‘Managing Medical Devices’,5 recognises the importance of the PC approach, asking those who select medical devices to explicitly consider the patient perspective. Planetree and the Picker Institute discussed evaluating equipment from a patient perspective,6 adding that the patient perspective complements and supports the traditional approach. Thus, for example, when assessing the need for MRI scanning, the PC approach will include maximising patient comfort (noise and environmental aspects) and the needs of particular patient groups (e.g. bariatric patients and children). In community settings, the PC approach considers how technology best supports and provides confidence to patients and carers, supporting safety, clinical therapeutics and quality of life. There is the need to understand their perception of medical technology and its day-to-day use in the home, with consideration of how they can be supported by healthcare professionals should problems occur.7 These considerations should lead to a specification that explicitly considers patient and carer needs. This issue is increasingly emphasised by the drive to shift the balance of care from hospital to community setting and allow more people to spend more time in a homely setting. In addition, the progressing health and social care integration agenda8 means that the professional carer may not be a registered nurse or other healthcare practitioner. The usability of devices may then have to match a range of skill levels including social work carers and care home staff. This wider pool of ‘users’ may also include the greater numbers of patients with chronic conditions being supported to self-manage their condition or to do so with support from their family. This shift in care setting and delivery, where well managed and supported, has attractions both for patients and healthcare resources. It is likely that medical devices will play an increasingly important role. Equipment specification should therefore encourage those who design and construct medical devices to incorporate patient–carer requirements by asking ‰ ‘ FEEDBACK Scope welcomes your feedback! @IPEMScope TABLE 1 Phase Traditional equipment management approach Person-centric approach 1. Acquisition 1.1 What is the clinical need and how can technology support it? Identify clinical need, linking to strategic plans and identify the technology to support this From the person perspective, can technology support care, and if so how and what technology is available? 1.2 Transform the clinical need into a clinical and technical specification that includes evaluation criteria a. Clinical function b. Governance and safety c. Technical requirements d. After-sales support e. Financial – acquisition and operating costs f. Evaluation criteria and scoring system a. Location of use (e.g. home) and implications including support b. Ease of use for non-professional: ergonomics, mistake-proofing c. Robust, size, weight, portability d. Aesthetics, shape, colour e. Utilities required f. Accessories, consumables g. Cleaning 1.3 Evaluate, select Look for what is not obvious Evaluate and score Evaluate and score from person perspective, with extra focus on ease-of-use by non-professional 1.4 Procure Comply with financial instructions Do products and consumables need delivery to community? 1.5 Commission Staff requirements, training, procedures Locations of use Physical installation, IT requirements, mounting Configure, test Documentation Supply of accessories and consumables Training, information for use (IFU) and guidance, procedures Practicalities and risks of use in the community and home Obtaining help if things go wrong Logistics and control of accessories and consumables supply 2.1 Normal operation Supply and disposal of consumables Ongoing training Documentation review Routine scheduled testing Continue to ensure patients and carers understand the purpose of the device Update training Manage patient–carer documentation Are additional considerations for supply and disposal of consumables needed? Manage routine maintenance, including any patient–carer maintenance required 2.2 Problems, faults Fault reporting Incident reporting Responding to safety warnings Ensure dialogue and communication How are problems reported and resolved? Incident reporting by patients – e.g. MHRA website When to withdraw from use Disposal compliance with waste regulations Are special considerations required for disposal outwith healthcare organisation? 2. Operation 3. Disposal TABLE 1. The equipment management pathway. Note: the term ‘person’ in the table includes patient and lay carer SCOPE | MARCH 2015 | 23 PERSON-CENTRED CARE FEATURE t FIGURE 4. The patient and carer experience is the focus, the keystone, integrating the equipment and patient journeys ‰ questions such as: ‘Describe how the product has been designed to enhance the patient experience’. Thus noise reduction and minimising the sense of claustrophobia will be considered for MRI scanners. A pump administering medication for pain and symptom relief will be designed to be intuitive to use with clear instructions, and attention given to weight and size for mobile patients.2, 9 The specification and evaluation should question how risks associated with the ‘environmental unpredictability’ of the care environment are managed and minimised by the device design.10 To explore and encourage ‘designing out risk’, evaluations should assess the extent to which mistake proofing has been achieved. Methods may include tamper-proof and child-proof protection measures. Evaluation and selection requires a multidisciplinary team approach with patient, clinician, clinical engineer, procurement and finance each contributing their expertise. The team approach must be managed to ensure sharing of views, without domination by vested interests. The acquisition phase will help direct the clinical operational phase. For example, will patients or carers operate the equipment? Patients will directly control some medical devices, even in hospitals (e.g. patient-controlled analgesia pumps). Patient care is enhanced when patients understand the clinical reasons for the medical devices.11 This understanding can relieve anxieties of family and friends seeing loved ones connected to medical devices. ‘It was awful seeing mum connected to all those tubes and wires.’ ‘Is it because I am about to die that you are connecting me to that pump?’ These anonymous comments echo surveys that show the need to address the emotional needs of patients with infusion devices.12 Home-care equipment (home dialysis, home ventilation, telemonitoring, infusion and feeding pumps) will typically require direct patient–carer control. Device controls should be logical and intuitive, with clear instructions for use in non-technical language. Unfortunately, there is still poor recognition of the importance of carer support and the impact of technology in the home.13 Processes for supplying and disposing of consumables, accessories and associated packaging should be implemented which consider patient pathways within and across relevant settings. Within the home-care environment, special arrangements for scheduled 24 | MARCH 2015 | SCOPE maintenance should be provided, including whether any patient–carer maintenance is required. Clear problemsolving procedures are required, whether the problem is equipment failure, consumable shortage or lack of confidence in equipment operation. Procedures should exist for reporting and providing feedback if an incident occurs. patients and carers to directly report adverse events, but this should be facilitated by local support systems.14 Greater attention is required to involve patients and carers in the safe and effective use of medical devices. The third and final HTM phase is deciding when to remove equipment from use. Procedures will be in place for disposal of equipment used within healthcare organisations. Procedures are required for equipment used within the community and in patients’ homes. An effective feedback loop to procurement and commissioning is essential throughout the HTM process. This ensures that future device development is informed by clinical and patient need with equipment fully fit for purpose rather than driven by manufacturers or solely by advances in technology. Discussion and conclusion This article challenges health technology management to focus on the needs of patient and carer, including everyone in the decision-making process. Achieving person-centric HTM requires implementation of practical steps that transforms the focus from technology to people. Person centeredness demonstrates the added value of a participatory team approach that recognises the knowledge, skills, competence and responsibilities of all involved; the patient, carers, clinicians, clinical engineers and other support staff. Practical application requires identifying the elements of person-centred equipment management. Table 1 summarises some elements of the lifecycle pathway, but is not exhaustive. It is important to incorporate the PC approach without losing sight of technological details, but rather see the two approaches as complementary. It is the integrated attention to the technology and the patient and carer that transforms the engineer into a clinical engineer. The keystone model3 symbolises this integration of the technical and clinical pathways and processes focussing on the patient and carer (figure 4). n ‘ ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Supported by a grant from the Scottish Government Health Innovation Patient Experience Fund REFERENCES 1 National Voices. http://www.england.nhs.uk/2012/12/11/narrativeintegrated-care (accessed 17th November 2014). 2 White H, King L. Enteral feeding pumps: efficacy, safety, and patient acceptability. Med Dev Evid Res 2014; 7: 291–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/MDER.S50050 3 Brooks-Young P, Amoore JN. Subcutaneous infusions for pain and symptom control in palliative care: introducing the keystone model. 19th PERSON-CENTRED CARE FEATURE International Congress on Palliative Care, Montreal, Canada, October 2012. 4 ECRI Institute. Patient-centered Care. Healthcare Risk Control, Executive Summaries, Volume 2, November 2012. www.ecri.org 5 MHRA. Managing Medical Devices: Guidance for Healthcare and Social Services Organisations. http://www.mhra.gov.uk/home/groups/dtsbs/documents/publication/con2025143.pdf (accessed 17th November 2014). 6 Planetree and The Picker Institute. Patient-centred Care Improvement Guide. Chapter 8: Patient centred approaches to data and technology. http://patientcenteredcare.org/chapters/chapter8.pdf (accessed 17th November 2014). 7 Smithard DG. Family carers/next-of-kin perceptions of home-care technology: a review. Smart Homecare Tech TeleHealth 2014; 2: 45–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/SHTT.S42675 8 Scottish Government. The Integration of Health and Social Care 20:20 Vision. http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Health/Policy/ Adult-Health-SocialCare-Integration (accessed 17th November 2014). 9 Hilbers ESM, de Vries CGJCA, Geertsma RE. Medical technology at home: safety-related items in technical documentation. Int J Technol Assess 2013; 29: 20–26. 10 Center for Devices and Radiological Health. Medical Device Home Use Initiative, April 2010. http://www.fda.gov/downloads/MedicalDevices/Pr oductsandMedicalProcedures/HomeHealthandCon sumer/HomeUseDevices/UCM209056.pdf (accessed 17th November 2014). 11 Pelletier SD. Patients’ experience of technology at the bedside: intravenous infusion control devices. J Adv Nurs 1992; 17: 1274–82. 12 Quinn C. Infusion devices: understanding the patient perspective to avoid errors. Nursing Times, October 2003. http://www.nursingtimes.net/infusiondevices-understanding-the-patient-perspectiveto-avoid-errors/199834.article 13 Bjuresäter K, Larsson M, Athlin E. Struggling in an inescapable life situation: being a close relative of a person dependent on home enteral tube feeding. J Clin Nurs 2012; 21: 1051–9. 14http://www.mhra.gov.uk/Safetyinformation/Reporti ngsafetyproblems/Devices/index.htm (accessed 17th November 2014). ‘ John Amoore is Head of Medical Physics, NHS Ayrshire and Arran. He has a special interest in health technology management, safe use of medical equipment and patient-centred care. ‘ Patricia Brooks Young is Lead Nurse for Palliative Care & Clinical Researcher NHS Lothian/ Edinburgh Napier University. She has a special interest in how person-centred care can be achieved within the realities of healthcare environments. myQA is an IBA Dosimetry GmbH product. OSL is the exclusive distributor in the UK & Ireland Get Connected! Join the Unique Global QA Platform. All-in-One • myQA Cockpit offers a complete overview of all your patient and machine QA on one screen. • Don’t miss any data, keep the overview anytime and anywhere!* All Connected All Secure • myQA Central Database integrates the data from all your QA applications. • Accessible throughout your department and even satellite sites. OSL-MKT OSL-MKT-141105-myQA -141105-myQA • myQA Cloud connects you with applications and know-how know-how.. • Benchmark your QA data anonymously with peers all over the world. *Data access throughout the hospital network. ww www.osl.uk.com w.osl.uk.com enquiry@osl.uk.com +44 (0)1743 462694 SCOPE | MARCH 2015 | 25 IMAGEJ FEATURE ImageJ: image processing and analysis in Java Gregory James (City Hospital, Birmingham) uses this open-source software in his department and finds it versatile and easy to use t FIGURE 1. Screen capture of the ImageJ toolbar interface (Windows 7) mageJ is free, open-source software used for image processing. It can read many image formats including TIFF, GIF, JPEG, BMP, DICOM and FITS. ImageJ can run either as an online applet or as a downloadable application through the website.1 The ImageJ software is written in Java, which means it can be installed on any of the three operating systems (Windows, Mac OS or Linux) as long as the computer has Java 1.5 virtual machine (or later). ImageJ is used in a range of academic specialisms (biology, astrophysics, etc.) and is growing in popularity amongst medical physicists, especially those working in nuclear medicine. It offers many image processing tools and functions that make it a useful resource for medical image processing. The ImageJ interface is very simple and shown in figure 1. I Why use ImageJ? Being public domain open-source software, an ImageJ user has the four essential freedoms defined by Richard Stallman in 1986: (1) the freedom to run the program, for any purpose; (2) the freedom to study how the program works, and change it to make it do what you wish; (3) the freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbour, and (4) the freedom to improve the program, and release your improvements to the public, so that the whole community benefits. Apart from being free, ImageJ offers all the basic tools and processing techniques required to view and manipulate medical images. This includes region of interest statistics, histogram analysis, profile analysis, plot creation and many more. ImageJ also supports standard image processing functions such as contrast manipulation, sharpening, smoothing, edge detection and spatial filtering. Simple processes like these can often 26 | MARCH 2015 | SCOPE be difficult to perform in other software packages or manufacturers’ own proprietary software. The data can also be easily exported from ImageJ if the user wishes to use other third party software, e.g. Microsoft Excel. ImageJ has a large and knowledgeable worldwide community with ‘more than 1,700 users and developers subscribed to the ImageJ mailing list’.2 Extensive help and documentation is available through the website, including a detailed 198-page user guide explaining each of the built-in features of ImageJ. There are specific tutorials for the more abstract/complicated functions, e.g. Fourier analysis. If issues are still unclear then questions can be raised through the ImageJ mailing list. For our department, it has provided a complete suite of gamma camera QA software tools which are platformand manufacturer-independent. We also have a range of standardised clinical analysis packages (e.g. renograms) which are also independent of camera manufacturer. The programs are also much easier to customise for any change in technique or recommendations. Programming in ImageJ ImageJ has its own macro language with extensive help and documentation provided on the website.3 In addition, the ImageJ community has created excellent tutorials on macro programming.4 The macro language is easy to learn and use (with a syntax similar to that of C or Java), making it ideal for beginners in computer programming. For the more experienced computer programmers, plugins are available where the power and magic of Java is utilised. Plugins are implemented as Java classes, which means that all the features of the Java language can be used. In a similar way that apps can be downloaded for a smartphone, a wide range of plugins are freely IMAGEJ FEATURE available through the ImageJ website.5 It is always worth searching through the list of plugins to check that somebody hasn’t already solved your problem before embarking on writing your own solution. As powerful as plugins are, the ImageJ macro language is not to be dismissed as ‘too simplistic’. Some very powerful features are still available in the macro language. Image processing When DICOM data is opened with ImageJ, the data is presented in its raw, native format. For colleagues that are used to viewing DICOM images on commercial software this can be a bit of an unwelcome surprise. Most commercial software packages will perform some sort of cosmetic smooth to the images or interpolate the pixels without the user realising it. However, this is one of the advantages of ImageJ as it takes nothing away from the user or the data. For this reason, ImageJ is an excellent teaching platform for trainees and students to learn about image processing techniques. This is a particularly important skill to have in the field of nuclear medicine where image processing is critical to the clinical interpretation of the images. Such techniques include smoothing filters, pixel interpolation and pixel truncation. Region tools One of ImageJ’s strengths is that it allows the user to manipulate regions of interest. There are dozens of builtin functions available under [Edit > Selection > …] of the ImageJ toolbar. As an example, using only two of the ROI functions it is possible to write a simple macro to automatically generate perirenal background regions of interest in a kidney scan (see figure 2). To write this functionality from scratch would be fairly complex, especially on manufacturers’ proprietary software where even simple tasks can be difficult to program. Using ImageJ, this complex task can be performed in several lines of code. given the constant evolution of imaging and processing techniques and the need to tailor programs to the needs of the individual department. Manufacturers’ nuclear medicine processing platforms offer many image processing tools but where there are shortfalls, ImageJ can be very useful in filling in the gaps. To quote the ImageJ website: ‘user-written plugins make it possible to solve almost any image processing or analysis problem.8 In other words, as long as you have the imagination and the programming ability, anything is possible! ImageJ was first used within the department to address a requirement for vendor-independent gamma camera QC analysis. The department was responsible for gamma cameras from three different manufacturers, each using their own software to analyse QC data to their own specifications. Often, there was little information available on how the results of such analysis packages were derived. This made crosscomparison between systems impossible, and checks against standard specifications very difficult. We therefore saw the need for an independent platform to analyse gamma camera QC data to ensure a consistent approach between different systems. Since ImageJ was free, accessible and easy to use, it was the obvious choice. Initially, some very basic analysis programs were written quite quickly (with sub-optimal programming!). Over time, the programs evolved into a complete gamma camera QC analysis suite that offers automatic data archiving, trend analysis plots and automatic QC results summaries. We now use these programs routinely within the department and they have detected problems that manufacturer’s own software had missed. ‰ ‘ FEEDBACK Scope welcomes your feedback! @IPEMScope Fourier analysis and convolution t One of ImageJ’s strongest and most impressive functionalities is its ability to take the Fourier transform of an image and display the frequency contributions (power spectrum) in the form of a 2D image. This can be particularly useful if the user wants to make high-pass or low-pass filters for noise suppression or edge detection. An example is given in figure 3 which has been taken from the ImageJ user guide (available on the website).6 This technique of noise reduction is particularly useful when removing sinusoidal noise patterns from images. Such sinusoidal noise patterns manifest themselves as ‘spikes’ in the FFT image and so they can be masked out. When the FFT image is transformed back into real space, the noise is removed. Tutorials on this topic are available on the ImageJ website.7 FIGURE 2. Image showing the automatic kidney and background regions produced from a simple ImageJ macro The evolution of ImageJ in our department t In the field of medical physics, it is often necessary to write user-developed programs/software to perform tasks that can otherwise not be performed by standard packages. The culture of user-developed programs is especially prevalent within the field of nuclear medicine, FIGURE 3. Example of how the FFT image can be manipulated to pass or exclude various frequency components SCOPE | MARCH 2015 | 27 IMAGEJ FEATURE ‰ The gamma camera image uniformity program shown in figure 4 is an excellent showcase for the capabilities of ImageJ. The left half of figure 4 shows the gamma camera flood images for detectors 1 and 2 of a modern dual-headed gamma camera. The bottom two images are duplicates of the top two except they have been heavily windowed to exaggerate the non-uniformity of the detectors. The right half of figure 4 shows the differential uniformity histograms for detectors 1 and 2, for the useful field of view (UFOV) and the central field of view (CFOV). The method of analysis is defined by the National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA), which is an industry standard method of analysing the uniformity of a gamma camera flood field image. One of the conditions of NEMA uniformity analysis is that the size of the pixels within the image must be within a certain range. Most gamma camera systems acquire a flood field image using a much smaller pixel size. In order to use NEMA quantitative uniformity analysis the pixel data must be rebinned to achieve the required pixel size. This is a standard image processing technique in nuclear medicine where every 2 × 2 or 4 × 4 block of pixels are summed together, presenting the image as if it were acquired on a smaller imaging matrix, thus improving the signal to noise and facilitating a more accurate quantitative measurement. This process is sometimes referred to as ‘folding down’ the image. Most commercial nuclear medicine workstations will offer some form of ‘folding down’ process but their methods vary, with some incorporating pixel interpolation techniques. This is not the same as simply rebinning the pixel data as the noise characteristics become destroyed. Users should be vigilant to this and not be misled. Using ImageJ it is possible to write a simple program to perform this task properly in several lines of code. Once the pixel size of the image is correct, NEMA then states that the image must be smoothed using a specified 2D kernel. Most nuclear medicine workstations do not offer this functionality, but this is standard with ImageJ and can be achieved through the ImageJ toolbar [Process > Filters > Convolve…] or in a single line of code. Once the image has been smoothed, NEMA uniformity analysis uses the maximum and minimum pixel values in the socalled ‘useful field of view’ (UFOV) of the gamma camera detector. A simple ‘while’ loop can be used to detect the UFOV, then ImageJ’s built-in functionality can measure the minimum and maximum pixel counts to calculate the ‘NEMA uniformity’ index. These values can then be written to a simple .txt file, allowing the data to be saved and trend analysis plots to be produced; either within ImageJ itself (figure 5) or within third party software (e.g. Microsoft Excel) after export of the results. Trend analysis plots like the ones shown above are a vital tool in any department’s quality assurance programme. It is rare for manufacturers’ own software to offer this functionality. Measuring spatial resolution using convolution techniques ‘ FEEDBACK Scope welcomes your feedback! @IPEMScope ImageJ has the ability to perform a wide range of image maths; for example, adding images together, subtracting images, etc. One of the more impressive tasks is ImageJ’s ability to convolve two images together. This can be useful 28 | MARCH 2015 | SCOPE for research. Using convolution techniques it is possible to measure the spatial resolution of an imaging system if a ‘contrast-type’ phantom is used. Typically a ‘contrast-type’ phantom would mean something with line-pairs, e.g. a Huttner phantom for diagnostic x-ray systems or a fourquantrant bar phantom for gamma cameras. Given that the object being imaged is discrete (i.e., black or white on a representative image), if this is convolved with a Gaussian point spread function (describing the spatial resolution of the system) then the resulting image will give sinusoidal pattern. The caveat to this is that the spatial resolution should be comparable or greater than the object being imaged. This is shown pictorially in figure 6. Using this principle, it is possible to write a simple program to get ImageJ to simulate specified object sizes (line pairs), and then convolve the image with a theoretical point spread function describing the spatial resolution of the imaging system. If this process is repeated (using a ‘for’ loop) for various object sizes and point spread functions, it is possible to generate a detailed lookup table of spatial resolutions and image contrasts. When the phantom is imaged, the contrast can be measured from the plot profile. The contrast measurement can then be converted into a full-width half-maximum (FWHM) for the point spread function. Figure 7 shows this theory in practice. Validation of the program shows that the spatial resolution calculated using a convolution technique matches very closely the resolution calculated directly from an acquired point spread function. Clinical use of ImageJ The use of ImageJ within the department evolved from gamma camera QC analysis to processing full clinical studies for diagnostic purposes. This raises the interesting question of whether this use of open-source software becomes a clinical device as defined by the MHRA.9 Of course, according to professional ethic at the very least, all programs should be subject to standard QC software procedures, e.g. verification and validation. Using ImageJ it was possible to produce customised analysis programs tailored to fit the specific requirements of the department. The programs were written with due consideration given to the needs of every staff group. Colleagues were given the opportunity to contribute their own thoughts and ideas on the font, colour scheme, layout, etc. which were considered in the design. Special consideration was given to the output being readable by non-nuclear medicine staff, e.g. referring clinicians who review such cases at MDT meetings. The final products are a testimony to how programs can be written to the specifications of the staff groups involved. Figure 8 is an example of a renogram study that was processed using the ImageJ program. For readers not familiar with renograms, the study shows a normal right kidney (blue curve) and a poorly functioning and obstructed left kidney (green curve). ImageJ can produce quality outputs that are easy to interpret for the reporting clinician. In the renogram study above, this includes generating clear ‘activity-time’ curves and displaying the results in large, bold text. The images have also been annotated with the regions of interest so that the reporter can check the quality of the region drawing by the processor. This program offers several IMAGEJ FEATURE t FIGURE 4. Example of the NEMA uniformity program written in ImageJ t FIGURE 5. An example of trend analysis plots that can be generated from a text file SCOPE | MARCH 2015 | 29 IMAGEJ FEATURE ‰ advantages over other commercially available software; specifically, the generation of curves that show the excretion of tracer from the kidneys and the support of delayed imaging (as in this example where the patient was imaged again at 80 minutes post injection). In addition, we have been able to implement the more detailed Rutland-Patlak analysis technique, not commonly available. A second screen generated in ImageJ has the details of the analysis used by the operator, and this is available to the reporter. Figure 9 shows the Rutland-Patlak plots for both kidneys. These plots are critical to the quality of the study. The user must define the ‘linear’ region of the plots which are shown by the blue data points. The red data points have been excluded from the ‘linear’ region. The relative gradients of the lines of best fit give the relative kidney functions (left: 29 per cent, right: 71 per cent in this case) and the y-axis intercepts give the relative amount of background to subtract from the raw kidney curves. DICOM compatibility t FIGURE 6. Example of how the image is a result of the object convolved with the spatial resolution of the imaging system t FIGURE 7. Example output from the ImageJ program used to measure spatial resolution using a four-quadrant bar phantom ImageJ accepts all kinds of image formats, including DICOM which has relevance to the medical physics community. ImageJ does not natively support saving images in DICOM format, but the ImageJ community has addressed this problem and there are plugins available through the ImageJ website that allow this. One plugin of interest is from the Institut für Telematik in der Medizin (IFTM)10 and another plugin is the Tudor DICOM plugin.11 The Java source code for both plugins is freely available through both websites. Both plugins offer different features and functionality with advantages and disadvantages of each. The Tudor DICOM plugin saves as ‘explicit VR big endian’ whereas most commercial DICOM workstations only accept data of ‘implicit VR (little) endian’. Using this plugin, some work may be required to improve DICOM export compatibility. Secondly, the IFTM plugin exports data without the patient demographics in the metadata (DICOM header). This again is undesirable for clinical applications, but with a bit of work it is possible to alter the source code and preserve the metadata in the DICOM export process. This is one of the clear benefits of open source software and testament to ImageJ’s flexibility. A third option is to use a plugin called ‘nucmed’12 which exports data in Interfile format13. This plugin has proven to be a very useful tool for research and development in our department. It allows raw gamma camera data to be exported to ImageJ, manipulated and then imported back to a commercial DICOM workstation. Using this technique we have been able to research the effect of count loss and/or patient motion in tomographic projection data. This plugin has also been useful for Monte Carlo simulation experiments with SIMIND14, e.g. researching the minimum detectable size of a parathyroid adenoma. Non-image use of ImageJ FIGURE 8. Example of a renogram output from the ImageJ program t 30 | MARCH 2015 | SCOPE ImageJ is primarily designed to be used with images. However, ImageJ does offer some excellent tools to work with numbers and arrays. One tool of note is the curve fitting tool found under [Analyse > Tools > Curve Fitting…] of the ImageJ toolbar. This is a built-in program that optimises a mathematical fit to a set of data (X and Y) using an iterative process. ImageJ has a wide range of IMAGEJ FEATURE standard built-in fitting functions, e.g. polynomials, exponentials, Gaussians, gamma functions, etc., but the user can also define a customised function. This program is very powerful and easy to use. The user simply copies and pastes the data into a clipboard-type dialog window and clicks a button. ImageJ then does all the hard work in typically less than one second. This technique is used within our nuclear medicine department to quantify the biological uptake and excretion of tracer through an organ (specifically HIDA through the liver) using a biexponential model. software at zero cost. The caveat to this is that the user must invest the time required to write the program. The number of users is growing, together with an increasingly useful number of plugins, and there is a very useful user’s forum for help with any problems. All readers of this article should consider downloading ImageJ and having a play! For more information on ImageJ there is an excellent textbook called Digital Image Processing by Wilhelm Burger and Mark J. Burge. There is a whole chapter dedicated to ImageJ, which is the principle piece of software used for the book. Further information is also available on the ImageJ website: http://imagej.nih.gov/ij/index.html n ‘ Gregory James is a Clinical Scientist based at the Department of Physics and Nuclear Medicine, City Hospital, Birmingham, UK Similar software There are other software packages similar to ImageJ, for example MATLAB®, OsiriX, IDL, to name just a few. Readers of this article may be more familiar with these packages rather than ImageJ. All have advantages and disadvantages. MATLAB® is very powerful but has a steep learning curve and licences can require a significant financial investment. OsiriX is excellent for viewing DICOM images but has limitations with its built-in programming language, making it difficult to write certain customised programs. Like ImageJ OsiriX is free, but the major limitation is that OsiriX only runs on Apple computers. IDL is perhaps the least popular of the packages mentioned, mostly because of its steep learning curve and again it requires a significant financial investment. Other packages will perform the same tasks with greater efficiency. ImageJ2 There has been a recent release of a more powerful version of ImageJ called ImageJ2.15 It is a complete rewrite of ImageJ with its focus more on scientific imaging. ImageJ2 includes the stable, current version of ImageJ with a compatibility layer so that old-style macros and plugins can run the same as they currently do in the original ImageJ. The main advantage of ImageJ2 is its ability to work with 3D regions of interest (or volumes of interest). This will clearly be a major benefit within nuclear medicine imaging or other areas. REFERENCES Hyperlinks checked on 12th February 2015 1 http://imagej.nih.gov/ij/ 2 http://imagej.nih.gov/ij/features.html 3 http://imagej.nih.gov/ij/developer/macro/ functions.html 4 http://imagej.nih.gov/ij/docs/macro_reference_ guide.pdf 5 http://imagej.nih.gov/ij/plugins/index.html 6 http://imagej.nih.gov/ij/docs/guide/user-guide.pdf 7 http://imagej.nih.gov/ij/docs/examples/tem/ 8 http://imagej.nih.gov/ij/docs/intro.html 9 http://www.mhra.gov.uk/Howweregulate/Devices/ 10 http://www.iftm.de/telemedizin/dcmimex.htm 11 http://santec.tudor.lu/project/dicom 12 http://www.med.harvard.edu/JPNM/ij/plugins/ Interfile.html 13 http://www.nf.mpg.de/vinci3/doc/imageformats.html 14 http://www.msf.lu.se/forskning/the-simindmonte-carlo-program 15 http://fiji.sc/ImageJ2 t FIGURE 9. Representative output of the Rutland-Patlak analysis used by the operator The benefits of bespoke software The benefits of in-house developed bespoke software are endless. Above all, it promotes original and innovative thinking. The IPEM recently held a ‘Bespoke Software’ meeting in Manchester in October 2014 that explored the benefits and risks of bespoke software writing. It is not farfetched to say that developments in modalities such as MRI, nuclear medicine and radiotherapy would be significantly hampered without the freedom to write bespoke software. ImageJ offers the user this freedom. ImageJ is built on a reputable platform (Java) and version control is very straightforward. Conclusion ImageJ is a very versatile image analysis platform whilst being intuitive and easy to use. For simple tasks such as retrieving plot profile data, pixel value histograms or simple image processing techniques, it is difficult to imagine a better piece of software. ImageJ has the functionality to replicate the look and feel of commercial SCOPE | MARCH 2015 | 31 POLICY UPDATE Rosemary Cook CBE summarises members’ involvement in influencing policy across the UK on behalf of IPEM Workforce intelligence In September 2014, Andrew Tyler, Secretary of the UK Liaison Group, and Jemimah Eve, IPEM Workforce Intelligence Unit Officer, presented evidence at a workshop to discuss inclusion on the 2014 National Shortage Occupation List. The Centre for Workforce Intelligence (CfWI) was jointly commissioned by the Department of Health and Health Education England to provide recommendations to the Migration Advisory Committee about which health occupations should be included the list. Following initial research, the CfWI was proposing that radiotherapy physicists and possibly nuclear medicine healthcare scientists be included. IPEM provided evidence to support this, drawing on the work of our Workforce Intelligence Unit, and also suggested adding both radiotherapy and nuclear medicine practitioners to the list. Scottish consultation Also in September 2014, Colin Gibson, Vice President – Professional, co-ordinated a response from UKLG and other members of IPEM to the Scottish Government’s consultation on its Healthcare Science National Delivery Plan. The full response is on the IPEM website. Extended working hours A Working Group chaired by Gill Lawrence has published a Position Statement on extended working hours in radiotherapy services, and the impact of this on staffing, as a contribution to the national debate. The full report and a summary Position Statement are available on the IPEM website. 32 | MARCH 2015 | SCOPE IPEM was represented at the PSC annual lunch held at the House of Lords in November 2014 The President in action n 11th September – attended the Bioengineering14 conference to present Lionel Tarassenko with his HonFIPEM certificate and medal, together with the Minister for Life Sciences, George Freeman MP. n 30th September – attended the Health Care Science HEE Advisory Group meeting to discuss education and training policy issues. n 11th November – attended the Parliamentary and Scientific Committee’s 75th Anniversary Reception. Collaboration with HCPC Andy Mosson, Registrar of the Register of Clinical Technologists, and IPEM CEO Rosemary Cook met with the Health and Care Professions Council at their request, to help them put together evidence for the House of Commons Health Select Committee. This was commissioned following the HCPC’s earlier appearance in front of the committee to comment on professional regulation. This was an opportunity for IPEM to lobby for statutory regulation for clinical technologists. New AQA qualifications Colin Gibson lead the compilation of a response to the AQA’s work developing new science and level 3 technical qualifications in relation to medical physics in October. The response is posted on the IPEM website. Professional standards fees The UK Liaison Group also responded to the government’s consultation in November on proposals to allow the Professional Standards Authority to be funded by fees paid by the nine healthcare professional regulatory bodies it oversees, instead of by the government. PSC annual lunch IPEM was represented at the Parliamentary and Scientific Committee’s (PSC) annual lunch at the House of Lords in November by Anna Barnes, Vice President – External; Keratiloe Moyo, London Regional Chair, and Jessica Johnson, from the IPEM Trainees’ Network. The PSC is an all-party parliamentary group which includes members of the former Associate Parliamentary Engineering Group. This event was a chance to raise IPEM’s profile with the influential members who make up this committee. CLINICAL TECHNOLOGIST NEWS BY DAVID STANGE AND TREVOR WILLIAMS ‘ CLINICAL TECHNOLOGIST NEWS UPDATE NEWS UPDATE Update on the scheme for clinical technologists News at further attempts to enable technologists to obtain professional registration should be welcomed by all in their current roles following on from the statement released below: ‘We hope to submit a proposal for accreditation of the Register for Clinical Technologists (previously the VRCT) by the end of the year and to achieve accreditation during the first half of 2015’. Stephen Keevil – Scope Editorial, December 2014 In anticipation of perhaps full registration all clinical technologists should be keeping CPD records, if not doing so already. Forms and guidance for the uninitiated may be found on the IPEM website. Dosimetric effects of swelling or shrinking tissue during helical tomotherapy breast irradiation: a phantom study RADIOTHERAPY PHYSICS ll radiotherapy centres in the UK have protocols to follow when determining what action to take regarding replanning or compensation if the anatomy of the patient being treated alters shape during treatment. Some treatment sites are more straightforward in adapting the original plan to match the change in anatomy without the need for a rescan and replan. Traditionally one such site has been breasts. Often, a couple of weeks into treatment the breast tissue may swell before shrinking again during the remainder of the radiotherapy course. If the breast swells on treatment then the obvious adaptation has been to increase the field size to ensure the flash is adequate, providing everything else is within departmental tolerances, e.g. SSDs, separation and dose reference point distances. Equally, shrinkage compensation may have been calculated by a reduction of monitor units based on new measurements taken in the treatment room. However, with increasing use of VMAT, tomotherapy and forward-planned segmented treatments, is this simple approach adequate? An interesting paper from Rudolf Klepper and team at Gesundheitsverbund im Landkreis Konstanz, Germany, looks at these issues with particular regard to tomotherapy, but it is relevant to other IMRT techniques used clinically. The study looked at quantifying the under- or over-dosage of breast tissue as well as a specific focus on the surface dose received. A t FIGURE 1. Simulation of the irradiation of the left breast. (Top left) Water-equivalent cylinder phantom as the baseline medium for swelling, Gafchromic film in a 45° position; (top right) dose plan cross-section with PTV (black outline) and the OAR lung (black central area). The isodoses of the radiation plan are dark grey = 5 Gy ± 5% and white ≥ 2.5 Gy < 5 Gy. The dose profiles are investigated along the arrow. (Bottom left) Cylinder phantom as above, with a 15 mm Superflab layer as the baseline medium for shrinking, Gafchromic film in a 45° position; (bottom right) dose plan cross-section with PTV (black outline) and the OAR lung (black central area) ‰ SCOPE | MARCH 2015 | 33 CLINICAL TECHNOLOGIST NEWS BY DAVID STANGE AND TREVOR WILLIAMS ‰ To simulate the patient a homogenous water-equivalent ‘cheese phantom’ was used (figure 1). The size of the phantom was appropriate to the size of the thorax and the thickness of a female breast. A planning target volume (PTV) was created and planned with tomotherapy Hi-Art treatment planning system (TPS) 4.2.1 using the superposition/ convolution algorithm with polyenergetic point kernels for dose calculations. Gafchromic films were inserted for dosimetry using specific procedures for accurate surface dose measurements. To simulate swelling of the breast, successive 5 mm layers of Superflab bolus material were positioned on the phantom up to 15 mm. Similarly, to simulate shrinkage, 15 mm of Superflab was used as a baseline for treatment planning before taking measurements with just a 10 mm layer of Superflab (representing 5 mm shrinkage), then a 5 mm layer (10 mm shrinkage) and finally with no Superflab (15 mm shrinkage). Dose distributions were assessed using the integrated delivery quality assurance (DQA) software built into the TPS. Profiles along the 45 degree direction were measured using the film in the phantom. It was found that swellings of 5 mm, 10 mm and 15 mm would produce an average dose decrease to the PTV of 2 per cent, 5 per cent and 7 per cent of the prescribed dose, respectively. Just a 5 mm increase can lead to areas of underdosage of up to 23 per cent within the PTV (figure 2). The magnitude of these simulated swellings also led to reduced values of up to 72 per cent, 55 per cent and 50 per cent at the outer edge of the actual target volume. During breast tissue shrinkage, the dose increased from 100 per cent to 106 per cent, while surface dose increased from 29 per cent to 36 per cent, potentially intensifying the occurance of skin erythema. In the author’s opinion a rescan and replan should be considered for 5 mm swelling based on ICRU recommendations. With a 10 mm increase in swelling, a new scan and plan is deemed essential. Shrinkage of breast tissue may cause only a moderate overdose to the PTV, but the increase in skin dose may be a concern. ‘ MORE INFORMATION Klepper R, Höfel S, Botha U, Köhler P, Zwicker F. Dosimetric effects of swelling or shrinking tissue during helical tomotherapy breast irradiation: a phantom study. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2014; 15(4). http://www.jacmp.org/index.php/jacmp/a rticle/view/4873, doi:10.1120/jacmp.v15i4.4873 Both images © Rudolf Klepper, Sebastian Höfel, Ulrike Botha, Peter Köhler and Felix Zwicker t FIGURE 2. Dose-volume histograms for the PTV: (left) swelling of 0, 5, 10 and 15 mm; (right) shrinking of 0, 5, 10 and 15 mm. The profiles for 5 mm, 10 mm and 15 mm swelling or shrinking are coloured red, green and blue, respectively ‘ CLINICAL TECHNOLOGIST EDITOR COMMENTS: Rudolf Klepper has reported that around 20 per cent of breast patients treated at his clinic need rescanning and replanning due to swelling or shrinkage. It would be interesting to find out how many centres currently do something similar to the article. Please get in touch using the ClinTech forum on the IPEM website or email me at David.Stange@uhb.nhs.uk 34 | MARCH 2015 | SCOPE MEETING REPORTS KIRSTEN HUGHES Scope Meeting Reports Editor ‘ ONLINE MEETING REPORTS Reports of IPEM meetings are now online only, and together with online copies of the travel bursary reports can be found at: https://www.ipem.ac.uk/ConferencesEvents/Conferencereportsandabstracts.aspx IPEM meeting reports added since the last issue of Scope went to press include: Quality Assurance in Magnetic Resonance (14th November) by Daniel Butler. MR SIG’s biannual QA meeting included an overview of some of the key updates to IPEM’s Report 80 (published in 1998), anticipated in early 2015, as well as the application of automated QA analysis methods to improve interobserver variability and to speed up test-times. Developing Myocardial Perfusion Scintigraphy: Is Your Service Stressing or Resting? (7th October) by Andrew Harris. This meeting provided an opportunity for centres to report on developments and improvements to their services, with talks covering implementation of resolution recovery software, the impact of switching to the use of a different stress agent (regadenoson), and the extension of staff roles (technologists, radiographers and scientists) in the area of MPS. Meeting reports posted online after the copy deadline for this issue of Scope will also be available to be viewed. BOSTON & TROY, USA 8th–15th July 2014 ‘ A 7TH WORLD CONGRESS OF BIOMECHANICS COMBINED WITH A RESEARCH VISIT GEORGE ADAMS (Cranfield Forensic Institute, Centre of Musculoskeletal and Medicolegal Research, Cranfield University, Shrivenham, UK) s a PhD student in my first year, this trip was my first opportunity to attend a conference on biomechanics and to visit another university to discuss research, which proved to be a valuable and exciting experience. My trip to the USA was divided into two sections, the first was attending the World Congress of Biomechanics (WCB; figure 1) where I would be presenting a poster, and the second was a trip to Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI) in Troy, NY, to meet with Deepak Vashishth and his research team at the Center for Biotechnology and Interdisciplinary Studies to discuss possible future collaborations. The 7th WCB was held in Boston, MA, at the John B. Hynes Veterans Memorial Convention Center. The WCB is held every four years and is one of the largest, if not the largest, congresses of its kind for biomechanics. Attendees came from around the globe, with a large proportion from Europe. During the week over 1,400 posters were displayed in daily poster sessions. In addition to this, 80 podium sessions were given per day (run in parallel) alongside several plenary lectures. Peter Zioupos and I were the only attendees from Cranfield University, bringing two poster presentations with us. Tuesday 8th July FIGURE 1. 7th World Congress of Biomechanics, held in Boston, MA I decided to arrive on the Tuesday (the second day of the conference) as the trip was proving to be both long and expensive. My initial booking would have allowed me to arrive in time for morning coffee break; however, due to recently increased security for travelling to the USA regarding flat batteries (which was first implemented the day before my travel), I was delayed in order to retrieve a charger from my suitcase as my laptop battery was flat and in my hand luggage. This delay caused me to arrive several hours later than intended and ‰ SCOPE | MARCH 2015 | 35 MEETING REPORTS ‰ by the time I got to my hotel I had missed the day’s presentations. However, that evening I attended the European Society of Biomechanics (ESB) social where I was able to meet other ESB members and welcome in new council members. Wednesday 9th July The first session of the day commenced at 8am when I attended a session put together by Ralph Mueller (ETH Zürich, Switzerland) and Peter Pivonka (University of Melbourne, Australia) entitled ‘Multiscale techniques in biomechanics and mechanobiology’, which covered the first two time slots of the day. During the session they discussed some of the issues with the multiscale nature of mechanobiology and how they can be addressed. In between these two sessions were the plenary ESB award lectures, the first of which was for the S.M. Perren Research Award and FIGURE 2. George Adams, Zahra Asgharpour and Peter Zioupos (from left to right) in a break was given by Fulvia Taddei (Rizzoli between lectures Orthopaedics Institute, Italy) on the ‘Safety factor of the proximal femur during gait: a population-based finite element study’. This in vivo simulations. Another poster, entitled presentation discussed possible issues with in research. Another poster of interest was ‘Is computational bone assessment the current/previous understanding of by Simone Tassani (Institute for proximal femur safety factors and provided a comparable with mechanical and micro-CT Bioengineering of Catalonia, Spain) about well-validated model, giving a more in-depth measures?’ presented by Dharshini ‘Micro-CT study of trabecular fracture’, Sreenivasan (University of Auckland, New look than I have seen previously in the which identified the current issues of basing literature. The second presentation was from Zealand), using FE simulations and fracture prediction risk the winner of the ESB Best Doctoral Thesis in mechanical testing, showed strong on densitometry and used micro-CT to correlations in prediction of cortical and Biomechanics Award, Carlos Borau identify fracture regions in cancellous cancellous bone strength. Zamora (University of Zaragoza, Spain), bones as a predictive model. Further In the evening there was the WCB for his thesis entitled ‘Multiscale development of this work could help Banquet, hosted in the Veterans Memorial computational modelling of single cell improve clinical assessments. Auditorium. This provided an opportunity to migration in 3D’. His work was impressive The afternoon sessions were started by X. socialise and network in a broader sense but and interesting but of little relevance to my Edward Guo (Columbia University, NY, still in an academic environment. research interests. USA) and Tony Keaveny (University of During lunch I was introduced to Zahra California at Berkeley, CA, USA), entitled Asgharpour, a specialist in human modelling Thursday 10th July ‘Whole bone computations I’. This focussed, who engages in finite element analysis (FEA) During the poster session I was introduced to as the title suggests, on finite element modelling using commercial products such modelling of whole bones. The emphasis of Cathy Holt (Cardiff University), and we as THUMS (Total Human Model for Safety) discussed some of the issues that can be faced the session was on choices one needs to for automotive applications (figure 2). She make when designing a model as well as on as an engineer dealing with the clinical and was able to provide me with some valuable model validation. The second afternoon biological crossover that regularly occurs in insights into FEA on bone and the problems I biomedical engineering. One poster that was session, ‘Whole bone computations II’, run may face in my models, and I hope to discuss of particular interest to me was ‘Estimating by Professor Guo, Bert van Rietbergen modelling with her in more depth in the (Eindhoven University of Technology, The orthotropic elastic material properties using future. Netherlands) and Philippe Zysset clinically available imaging parameters’, Many of the posters presented focussed on presented by S. Majid Nazemi (University of (University of Bern, Switzerland), carried on the modelling of both micro- and macrothe discussion. The session developed it Saskatchewan, Canada), which looked at a scales of bone. One poster, called ‘Failure comparison between micro-CT scanning and further to discuss patient-specific morphology in human trabecular bone: a computations and its clinical relevance. clinical CT scanning of cancellous bone. He systematic classification’, was presented by performed statistical analysis on the lower Alexander Zwahlen (ETH Zürich, resolution clinical scan data to obtain values Friday 11th July Switzerland). He combined mechanical of bone mineral density (BMD) and bone The morning of the last day of the testing and micro-CT to observe different volume/total volume (BV/TV) that agreed, conference started with ‘Micromechanics of failure morphologies, and by performing this to a very high correlation, with the micro-CT bone and biomaterials’ by Harry van Lenthe alongside micro-finite element (FE) data. This is very important as it enforces the (University of Leuven, Belgium), which was simulations he was able to suggest criteria for clinical relevance of using micro-CT scanners followed by Alan Eberhardt (University of 36 | MARCH 2015 | SCOPE MEETING REPORTS FIGURE 3. The two posters presented by George Adams and Peter Zioupos of Cranfield University Alabama at Birmingham, AL, USA), Daniel Cortes (University of Delaware, DE, USA) and Professor van Lenthe with a session entitled ‘Interface mechanics in orthopedics’. These lectures focussed on the clinical aspects of the field which rounded off my time in Boston. The rest of Friday I spent travelling to Albany via the Greyhound coach service. It was nice to see that the USA’s bus services are just as delayed as ours. When I arrived at Albany I was met by Stacyann Morgan, a member of the RPI biomedical engineering team, who I stayed with for the remainder of my visit. Cranfield posters As previously mentioned, Peter and I brought with us two posters (figure 3), one of which I was the lead author of. The title was ‘Bone surface distribution from a wide porosity range in mammalian bone tissue’ in which I used micro-CT to assess the structure of bone in two ways. Firstly, it investigated the relationship between the porosity of bone and its active surface area, an important relationship when considering bone remodelling. Secondly, it assessed the relationship between the material density of bone and the apparent density, often referred to as tissue mineral density (TMD) and bone mineral density (BMD), respectively, which showed that at the extremes of porosity bone is significantly more mineralised. The lead author of the other poster was Jade Armstrong and was entitled ‘Assessment of the physicochemical modifications caused to bone by storage protocols’. In this work popular storage protocols for bone were used to assess the changes to the chemical, mechanical and crystalline properties of bone. This is of importance as different laboratories around the world use various different methods for storage that could be responsible for many of the discrepancies that occur between different research groups. Saturday 12th and Sunday 13th July Over the weekend no lab research activities had been planned for me so I took the opportunity to experience some American culture, something I hadn’t had time for in Boston. On Saturday I visited a mall for the first time and used the opportunity to fulfil the mandatory gift-buying for family back home. Whilst there I also got to experience a Dave & Buster’s arcade which was great fun. The weekend was rounded off on Sunday watching Germany’s win in the World Cup final. Monday 14th July Starting early on Monday I was given a tour of the labs of RPI’s (Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute) Biomedical Engineering (BME) Department. I was also introduced to the BME team. Shown in figure 4, with their corresponding areas of research, are Corinne Thomas (the study of bone fragility accounting for the chemical FIGURE 4. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute’s Biomedical Engineering team: (from left to right) Corinne Thomas, Dr Timothy Cleland, Catalina Bravo and Stacyann Morgan modifications in bone that occur with age and health), Dr Timothy Cleland (using a proteomics approach to identify the interaction between bone’s organic-mineral interface), Catalina Bravo (determining the contribution of cortical and cancellous bone in vertebral fractures of healthy and diseased mice) and Stacyann Morgan (the role of noncollagenous proteins in bone deformation and fracture using genetically modified mice). I was given an individual tour of each of their labs and a brief introduction into their research and goals. I also had lunch with Dr Deepak Vashishth, in which we discussed the various potential future collaborative ideas. Tuesday 15th July I started Tuesday with a full campus tour and an introduction to the resources available at RPI. This was followed by further talks with the research team. I really appreciated the hospitability of the team at RPI and the visit has given me the opportunity to expand my research. I would like to give special thanks to Stacy for housing me during my visit. I would like to thank IPEM for the travel bursary which made my trip possible. The next World Congress of Biomechanics will be held in four years’ time (2018) in Dublin; if it is anything like Boston it should be a very impressive and enjoyable event that I would thoroughly recommend. n ‘ GEORGE ADAMS is a PhD Researcher at Cranfield Institute, Cranfield University. SCOPE | MARCH 2015 | 37 MEETING REPORTS CHICAGO, USA 26th–30th August 2014 ‘ IEEE ENGINEERING AND MEDICINE IN BIOLOGY CONFERENCE CLAIRE TARBERT (Medical Devices Unit, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde) I n August 2014, the 36th IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Conference (EMBC) was held in Chicago. I was fortunate enough to attend the conference, along with two colleagues from NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, after we were invited to organise a session on ‘Medical technology and next generation mobile applications’. EMBC is one of the world’s largest and most comprehensive technical conferences focussed on biomedical engineering technologies. As such, it covered a very wide scope. The overarching theme of the conference was ‘Discovering, innovating and engineering future biomedicine’. The individual topics presented ranged from cutting-edge biomedical technology R&D, to the clinical application of new technologies, and the future of bioengineering education. EMBC was, by some distance, the largest conference I have attended, with 2,500 registered attendees from 65 different countries presenting 2,800 peer-reviewed papers. With such a busy programme (there were typically around 20 parallel oral sessions at any given time), it was only possible to attend a small fraction of the presentations. Those I did attend were necessarily skewed towards my own clinical and research interests, and in this report I’ve sought to highlight a selection that I found to be the most interesting. Wednesday 27th August A series of tutorials was held on Tuesday 26th August, but the conference itself began on Wednesday morning. The opening plenary lecture on ‘Systems medicine and transformational technologies and strategies: a revolution in healthcare’ was delivered by Leroy Hood (Institute for Systems Biology, Seattle, WA, USA). This was a really interesting talk that began by introducing the systems biology approach as applied to the search for protein biomarkers of disease. Dr Hood went on to discuss the 100k Wellness Project, which is in its early stages. This study aims to recruit 100,000 subjects who will have their genome sequenced and their biometrics (clinical chemistry, heart rate, respiration, blood pressure, quality of sleep, gut microbiome) tracked over 20–30 38 | MARCH 2015 | SCOPE years. It is anticipated that some subjects will stay well, whilst others will transition to disease as determined by their genome, modulated by environmental factors. An enormous amount of monitoring data is anticipated and the authors aim to mine that for metrics to define wellness. In addition, they aim to provide actionable information to participants to prevent disease and to ultimately create models of improving health for the general public. This approach is dubbed ‘P4 medicine’ by the authors: predictive, personalised, preventive and participatory. The study is in the pilot stages (see figure 1) with 100 participants recruited, but aims to scale up to 1,000 subjects by the end of the year and eventually to 100,000 subjects. The technical challenges of collecting and analysing such large and complex datasets are clearly significant and require the input of a multidisciplinary team of physicists, engineers, chemists, biologists, clinicians and more. A phased start has been chosen in order to put in place the frameworks necessary for such a largescale study. One of the highlights of the day was a keynote lecture by Stephen Oesterle (Medtronic, Inc., Minneapolis, MN, USA), deceptively titled ‘Converting low power micro electronics, data and communication technologies into medical devices’. The talk began with a review of some of Medtronic’s latest implantable devices, for example a wireless cardiac pacemaker that can be positioned directly into the ventricle wall. However, Dr Oesterle branched out from that topic to discuss the global inequality in terms of access to healthcare; whilst three billion people have access to at least a rudimentary health service, four billion have essentially none. He proposed that the current methods of western healthcare delivery are inefficient and prohibitively expensive. In order to reach the masses, he suggested that we must leverage the recent advances in wireless monitoring and mobile communication, to distribute diagnostic and therapeutic technologies to people where they live, upload that data to an off-site physician or to a cloud for automatic analysis, and direct the patient to a hospital as and when needed. He left it as a (significant!) challenge to the engineering community to design the technology to make that a reality. Thursday 28th August On Thursday morning, our group presented in the invited session ‘Medical technology and next generation mobile applications’. Analysis of mobile device trends suggests that over 80 per cent of healthcare professionals use smartphones in their daily professional capacity. This session was proposed as a means of illustrating how powerful, cost-effective solutions using smartphones and tablets are improving detection and diagnosis of common medical conditions. Despite starting at 8am, the session was well attended with between 50 and 60 people showing up. Alexander Weir (NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Glasgow) began by presenting a suite of cognitive assessment apps designed for the assessment of dementia and delirium. The Edinburgh Dementia App implements two test paradigms that are candidates for the discrimination between Alzheimer’s disease and mild cognitive impairment. Delirium is an acute, severe deterioration in mental functioning with severe consequences for patient outcome and is known to be under-diagnosed. The DelApp provides a suite of simple cognitive tests, including a visual acuity test and word building and counting tasks as a means of measuring inattention. Both apps were demonstrated to have good test accuracy. Jay Carlsson (University of NebraskaLincoln, Lincoln, NE, USA) presented a behavioural monitoring system that utilises communication between a smart watch worn by the user and a wireless sensor network positioned around the home to provide localisation of the user’s position via received signal strength indication (RSSI). This system was a prototype demonstrating that accurate real-time localisation is achievable with a low-cost system. The authors hope to build on this system to create a home monitoring system capable of performing a wide array of behavioural classification, ultimately as a means of reducing the cost MEETING REPORTS FIGURE 1. Schematic showing the data being monitored in the pilot study for the 100k Wellness Project FIGURE 2. A typical retinal image captured with the Peek smartphone-based ophthalmoscope of long-term care by delaying its onset and improving its efficiency. Mario Giardini (University of Strathclyde, Glasgow) presented results from the Peek smartphone-based ophthalmoscope; an optical adapter and smartphone application that can be used as a low-cost alternative to a direct ophthalmoscope. It provides highresolution views of the retina through a dilated pupil (figure 2) and impressive results were shown demonstrating excellent agreement in glaucomatous disc grading of optic nerve head images when compared to commercial diabetic retinal screening cameras. An Android app designed to measure the second heart sound split was presented next by Shanti Thiyagaraja (University of North Texas, Denton, TX, USA). The device pairs a stethoscope attached to an external microphone and a Nexus 4. It implements continuous and discrete wavelet transforms to interpret the aortic and pulmonic components in the second heart sound and uses that information to classify them as normal and abnormal. It is designed to allow daily monitoring of heart sounds in any environment that can easily be shared with health professionals. I presented the Stroke Vision app: an Android-based screening tool for the assessment of visual impairments in for success’. Again, for a session starting at 8am, it was well attended. Four papers were presented, with each of the authors stressing the high incidence of preventable blindness that could be reduced if screening technology was more widely distributed. This would require a low-cost ophthalmoscope as the fundus cameras in common clinical use typically cost in the order of £10,000. Each of the four projects took a different approach, in both the design of the optics and the approach to commercialisation. However, there were common themes: all were interested in facilitating teleophthalmology whereby images are acquired at a remote site and either automatically analysed or uploaded to a reading centre. The first three devices targeted diabetic retinopathy. Craig Robertson (Epipole, Rosyth, UK) introduced Epipole: a handheld camera that requires minimal training, can be used without dilation, is equipped with a USB interface to connect to a PC, uses cloud-based storage for the large quantities of data expected from a screening programme, and is designed exclusively for the detection of diabetic retinopathy. Paul Yates (Retivue, Charlottesville, VA, USA) described a retinal imager comprised of an optical adapter that integrates with off-the-shelf DSLRs. IDx, who were represented by ‰ stroke survivors. Visual defects associated with stroke are under-diagnosed and can act as a barrier to successful rehabilitation outcomes. The Stroke Vision app includes a series of assessments designed to identify the most common visual impairments associated with stroke, together with educational material targeting staff, patients and their carers. It is intended to improve the screening of visual stroke and thereby improve rehabilitation outcomes. Iain Livingstone (NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Glasgow) then rounded off the session with an interesting talk showing the potential for mobile technology in infant acuity testing. He presented a comparison between a novel tablet-based assessment and the current card-based standards. The results suggest that the app provides improved test-retest reliability at, surprisingly, a significantly lower cost than the card-based alternatives. Overall, I thought this session demonstrated the wide application which mobile technology can have and how mobiles and tablets are rapidly becoming low-cost, generic medical devices. Friday 29th August I began Friday by attending a minisymposium on ‘Low cost fundus cameras: state-of-the-art and key factors SCOPE | MARCH 2015 | 39 MEETING REPORTS ‰ Eric Talmage (Iowa City, IA, USA), had Saturday 30th August also developed a non-mydriatic fundus camera but their primary interest was in software development and the production of robust, reliable algorithms for detection of pathology. Mario Giardini presented on the Peek smartphone-based ophthalmoscope that had been discussed on Thursday. This time Dr Giardini focussed on the technical details of the adapter and its intended use for remote diagnostics, particularly in developing countries. By using the native camera on the phone, retinal images can be tagged with GPS, allowing patients to be tracked for follow up. All authors stressed that the challenge of designing and building ophthalmoscopes with sufficient image quality for retinal screening at a low cost has long since been overcome. However, creating a sustainable business model to sell low-cost medical equipment is not simple. This session was a fascinating insight into what can be achieved with low-cost equipment, as well as some of the challenges of lowering the cost of healthcare in general. Before lunch, John Gore (Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA) delivered a keynote lecture on ‘Current and future trends in biomedical imaging’. This was a comprehensive summary of the current status of the major imaging modalities (CT, PET, MRI, ultrasound), the physical and technological factors that limit each, and the potential for future advances. In particular, he discussed the push towards quantitative imaging and stressed the importance of better understanding the cellular, molecular and physiological properties of tissues which give rise to the acquired signals. Whilst this was largely a summary of the current imaging landscape, it was particularly interesting for someone like me who does not specialise in one of the major imaging modalities. In the afternoon I attended a powerful presentation by Chris Jerry (Emily Jerry Foundation, Mentor, OH, USA) on ‘Patient care and safety through the adoption of technology’. He told the story of his 2-yearold daughter, and how a mistake by a pharmacy technician in drawing up the prescription for her last round of chemotherapy led to her death. Since 2006 he has worked towards using technology to improve patient safeguards, an example being the promotion of RFID (radiofrequency identification) chips to track medication as a means of preventing errors in the administration of drugs. It was a good reminder of the vital role physicists and engineers can play in ensuring patient safety. The highlight of the final morning for me was a lecture by Maryellen L. Giger (University of Chicago, IL, USA) on ‘Decoding breast cancer with imaging and big data: imaging phenotypes in breast cancer risk assessment, diagnosis, prognosis, and response to therapy’. Dr Giger began by discussing the limitations placed by physics and safety considerations on current imaging modalities, and how utilising quantitative imaging techniques will allow imaging to continue to evolve. She stressed the increasing need for objective quantitative analysis instead of only qualitative viewing of images, and used the example of breast cancer to illustrate these points. In Dr Giger’s research, the process begins by quantitatively extracting lesion characteristics from multimodality images. In mammography, she uses these segmentations along with classification algorithms to provide decision support to radiologists, with the computer acting as a second reader. By data-mining large data sets of this type, along with histopathology, molecular tumour classifiers and genomic information, they are able to define imagebased biomarkers for risk of cancer, for screening, diagnosis and treatment monitoring. 40 | MARCH 2015 | SCOPE Chicago Chicago is the largest city in the Midwest with a population of around 9 million. It is situated on the shores of Lake Michigan and is known for its music, art and architecture. There was a lot to explore across the entire greater Chicago area, but with only a day and a half of free time, our group was really limited to the downtown area. On Tuesday afternoon a number of us visited the Art Institute of Chicago (figure 3). The Art Institute’s collection is vast; it is the second largest in the US, after the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York, and covers everything from preRenaissance paintings through to contemporary art. When we visited, an exhibition of the surrealist painter René Magritte’s work was on show. It featured around 100 of his most famous pieces and interestingly some of his early advertising work. In his own words, Magritte sought to ‘make everyday objects shriek aloud’ and based on this exhibition alone, with the help of some very atmospheric lighting, he certainly achieved that! I think my favourite part of the museum, however, was the incredible collection of Impressionist art. Taking up almost an entire floor and featuring some of the most well-known pieces from the period (Seurat’s A Sunday afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte, Renoir’s Two Sisters), I think it was worth the entry fee alone. The Art Institute is located on the edge of Grant Park, a large urban green space on the shores of the lake. One corner of the park was annexed in 2004, renamed Millennium Park, and now houses large-scale interactive public art installations such as Cloud Gate (dubbed ‘The Bean’ by locals, figure 4) and Crown Fountain (figure 5). It is obviously a really popular place with visitors and locals, with plenty of people enjoying the park during the day and in the evening. Millennium Park is also home to the Jay Pritzker Pavilion, a really impressive stainless steel bandshell, designed by Frank Gehry. During our trip, the pavilion was being used to host a series of free open-air concerts as part of the Chicago Jazz Festival and on Friday night a group of us were able to catch some of the music. Chicago is known for its varied and innovative architecture and it was immediately impressive on arrival downtown. The city was founded in 1833, but around 40 years later, much of what had been built was destroyed in a fire. This was seized upon by the architects of the time and the devastated city was used as a blank canvas to test out new designs. The timing of the fire coincided with the development of technology allowing for the construction of steel-framed buildings, and in fact the world’s first all steel-framed skyscraper was built in Chicago. On Saturday afternoon, a group of us took a Chicago Architecture Foundation boat tour along the Chicago River. It was a fascinating insight into the architecture of the city, and an opportunity to view some of the first prototype skyscrapers of the 1890s, the art deco and mid-century modern buildings, right through to the postmodern buildings still being built today, all from a different perspective on the river (figures 6, 7 and 8). I would like to thank IPEM for provision of a travel bursary that, together with a contribution from the Department of Clinical Physics and Bioengineering (NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde), made it possible for me to attend IEEE EMBC 2014. n ‘ CLAIRE TARBERT (BSC HONS, MSC, PHD) is a Senior Scientist in the Medical Devices Unit, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde. She has a special interest in visual electrophysiology and the application of mobile technology to healthcare, and is an associate member of IPEM. MEETING REPORTS FIGURE 3. The Art Institute of Chicago FIGURE 4. The Cloud Gate sculpture/The Bean FIGURE 5. Crown Fountain FIGURE 6. The Chicago skyline FIGURE 7. Marina City (1964) FIGURE 8. The Chicago Tribune Building (1923) SCOPE | MARCH 2015 | 41 MEETING REPORTS SECC, GLASGOW 31st August – 2nd September 2014 ‘ MEDICAL PHYSICS AND ENGINEERING CONFERENCE AND RADIOTHERAPY MEETING LAURA MORAN (Trainee Clinical Scientist of the North London Consortium, based in Radiotherapy at Barts Health NHS Trust, London) am very grateful to IPEM for awarding me the IPEM bursary which enabled me to attend their annual Medical Physics and Engineering Conference (MPEC) in Glasgow in September 2014 (figure 1). This provided me with my first opportunity to attend and present work at a large national scientific conference and also an excuse to visit Glasgow, Scotland’s largest city! This year MPEC also incorporated the Biennial Radiotherapy Meeting, which was of particular interest to me as an STP trainee specialising in radiotherapy. The conference was held in the Scottish Exhibition and Conference Centre (SECC) which is located on the north bank of the River Clyde. Unbeknown to me prior to my visit, Glasgow is a city renowned for its architecture, having been named UK City of Architecture and Design in 1999. Adjacent to the SECC is the impressive Clyde Auditorium, affectionately called ‘The Armadillo’ (figure 2); it is a modern example of just one of the many beautiful buildings that can be found throughout Glasgow (figure 3). MPEC is IPEM’s annual conference and so it was very well attended, with almost 300 representatives from many locations throughout the UK, Europe, the USA and even as far afield as Australia and New Zealand. With 46 invited speakers, 80 proffered speakers and 36 posters there was plenty to keep all the attendees entertained and engaged over the three days! Back in April I submitted an abstract to MPEC on the work I had begun and planned to carry out in the coming months for my Masters project, which was concerned with investigating the effects of thoracic motion on volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) treatments. I was delighted when I found out a few weeks later that I would be presenting my work at the trainee session; however, I will admit that the idea of presenting my work at a national scientific conference was very daunting! The months leading up to the conference kept me very busy with gathering all of my results and writing my presentation. MPEC commenced on Sunday 31st August with a welcome breakfast and opening ceremony followed by workshops in the afternoon, which I was unfortunately unable to attend. Thankfully, however, I was I 42 | MARCH 2015 | SCOPE able to attend the drinks reception that evening at Merchant Square, which was a great opportunity to catch up with familiar faces and do some networking. The IPEM trainee network had also organised a social event on the Sunday evening after the drinks reception which was a good way to meet some other trainees from different parts of the country. Monday morning began bright and early with the first talk scheduled for 8.30am. I spent the morning at the trainee session where I was very impressed by the high standard of presentations. My time to speak was upon me before I knew it and I was very nervous making my way up to the podium. Thankfully, once I started talking most of my nerves went away. I was delighted when it was all over and I was glad I had pushed myself to do it! I would encourage other trainees to present their work at the trainee session at MPEC as it provides a friendly and supportive audience which I felt was a great introduction to presenting work at a large scientific conference. After my presentation I was able to relax and enjoy the conference. With five sessions running in parallel throughout Monday and Tuesday, covering a range of topics such as diagnostic imaging, radiotherapy physics, big data, physiological measurement and nuclear medicine, it was a challenge choosing which talks to attend! The following are presentations that I found particularly interesting. Woolmer lecture Every year at MPEC there is a Woolmer lecture dedicated to Professor Ronald Woolmer, the first President of the Biological Engineering Society (1959) and also the first director of the Research Department of Anaesthetics at the Royal College of Surgeons (1957). This year’s Woolmer lecture was entitled ‘A gateway to innovation’ and was given by David Keating (NHS Greater Glasgow & Clyde, Glasgow). In his lecture Professor Keating outlined the historical role that scientists and engineers in clinical departments have had in developing healthcare technology, highlighting in particular Glasgow’s strong history of innovation in this area. He discussed the current landscape of clinical sciences and the challenges that healthcare faces in the coming years, such as changing patient demographics, rising healthcare costs, increased workloads and extended working hours. A possible solution to these challenges could be the greater adoption of new technologies, procedures and diagnostics for which scientists embedded in clinical departments will play a crucial role. Professor Keating concluded the lecture with a fascinating introduction to some of his research on the structural and functional imaging of the retina using micromultifocal electroretinography (ERG). Debate As a young physicist starting off my career in radiotherapy I was particularly interested in listening to the debate that ‘Treatment planning is now a mostly technical task and requires little physics input’, which I’m happy to say did not disappoint! Carl Rowbottom (The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester) started off the debate for the motion. He reframed the question that planning is now a mostly automated task and requires no physics input. He discussed how humans are not suited to treatment planning which is effectively a manufacturing process, that manual treatment planning can be stressful, leading to an increase in errors, and the automation of the process would lead to increases in productivity. Dr Rowbottom continued to say that automated treatment planning is already here, quoting several recent studies that investigated the generation of fully automated plans. Next, Jason Cashmore (Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham) took to the stage against the motion. He began by trying to define exactly what is meant by treatment planning: whether it is the physical creation of a treatment plan for a patient or all the steps in delivering the best plan for each patient. He agreed that the majority of planning tasks can be protocolised but who is responsible for creating these protocols and what happens when a patient doesn’t fit the protocol? With the increasing use of various different imaging techniques and modalities such as PET, MRI, image fusion, deformable registration and 4DCT, an in-depth physics knowledge is required. Additionally, as radiotherapy is a rapidly changing field and MEETING REPORTS Image © Justine Tyler FIGURE 2. A side view of ‘The Armadillo’, Glasgow FIGURE 1. My ‘skelfie’ from the IPEM stand new technology will continue to be introduced into departments such as VMAT with couch rotation, MRI linacs, proton therapy, cone-beam CT and MRI-based planning, adaptive therapy and radiobiology, if physics are not involved in planning then how will they be able to make informed judgements on these new techniques? After some questions and answers the debate seemed to conclude that physics should definitely have some role in the treatment planning process. However, the question of whether this includes the physical creation of treatment plans seems to be undecided. Skin margins in VMAT Justine Tyler (Barts Health NHS Trust, London) discussed the use of ‘Skin margins for RapidArc optimisation: how much is FIGURE 3. George Square and Glasgow City Chambers enough?’. She explained in detail the problem that can arise if the clinical target volume (CTV) is contoured close to the skin; the build-up region in the CTV can receive high doses for inversely planned IMRT/VMAT treatment plans. The use of optimisation margins (OM) from the skin has been shown to reduce these high dose areas. Mrs Tyler described her work which investigated the optimal OM to be used and also how resilient these OM are to setup uncertainties. MRI-guided radiotherapy Invited speaker David Thwaites (University of Sydney, Australia) gave a fascinating talk on the ‘Observations and rationale for MRlinac use: the Australian MR-linac project as an example’. There are only three other similar projects in the world that are clinical or almost clinical with MRI-guided radiotherapy. MR imaging offers the ultimate in soft tissue position verification and realtime intrafraction monitoring. Professor Thwaites outlined some of the different techniques that are used in MR-guided radiotherapy and some of the issues involved in their implementation. These include low-field MR imaging with cobalt-60 sources, split bore magnets orientated inline or perpendicular to the linac and then the complications of electron return from interactions with the magnetic field. I found the talk very interesting and thought that it gave an insight into radiotherapy’s very exciting future! n ‘ LAURA MORAN BSC MSC is a trainee clinical scientist with the North London Consortium, specialising in Radiotherapy Physics at St Bartholomew’s Hospital. SCOPE | MARCH 2015 | 43 BOOK REVIEWS Factory Physics for Managers INTRO W Factory Physics for Managers may be a surprise choice as a book review for IPEM, but as many IPEM members have managerial responsibilities is it prudent to ask whether or not their physics background can prove beneficial in managerial aspects of their jobs? The book describes how scientific processes can be applied in the management of manufacturing-based industry or supply chain. Whilst this specific focus makes much of the text irrelevant to those reading this review, there is some content of which a physics department – and the NHS in general – could take note and parallels that can be drawn from the examples are included. The use of the term ‘physics’ in the title sounds impressive; in fact, the scientific analysis that is presented in the book is straightforward, though it is accurate and usually absolutely sensible. Some concepts or analyses are presented as equations, usually to allow efficiency increases to be quantified as percentages. In doing so, analysis such as mean, standard deviation, variance and coefficient of variation are introduced and used throughout. Some of the example analyses were logical and useful, but the benefit was less clear in other examples where it seemed that variable were calculated because they could be. The scientific analysis in the text often felt quite obvious. When introducing the concept of ‘undercapacity scheduling’ e have a rather packed and exciting mix of book reviews in this first 2015 issue! There are six book reviews which cover the medical physics and popular science genres. A list of the reviewed titles with reviewers can be found in table 1. There are a number of new medical physics and popular science textbooks in the ‘Just Published!’ section, one of which is Bioengineering: A Conceptual Approach. This book explores critical principles and new concepts in bioengineering integrating the biological, physical and chemical laws and principles that provide a foundation for the field. The ‘New Reports and Newsletters’ section lists some useful items. An update to the ‘Safer Radiotherapy’ report is also provided. Links to the latest newsletters of the AHCS, EFOMP and IOMP can be found in this section. Do you read any other medical physics newsletters that may be useful to the readership? If so, I would be very interested to hear from you. Urgent request! We would like to increase our current numbers of book reviewers to fulfil our quarterly target of seven book reviews. Reviewing counts towards your CPD (see ‘Self-directed learning’, HCPC Guidance to Standards for CPD – duties as a registrant). Moreover, reviewing a book means you get to keep it. As part of the reviewing process, we use an online collaboration tool known as Wiggio, offered free by Desire2Learn, in which reviewers will find a list of the latest book reviews and book request status. The tool is also used to upload book reviews and for all Scope activities. If you would like to review a book (no matter how old!) or have a comment on any part of Scope then please email me. (building down-time into a system in expectation of failures), is it not obvious that any service that is completely reliant upon every component working perfectly as planned at all times is doomed to fail? In general, the book encourages individualised planning of a service and not copying something that exists elsewhere (but also champions Toyota throughout). In doing this, the book stresses how important it is that all aspects of the process be considered and modelled – as a physicist might compare a model against empirical measurement for verification. Once again the approach is sensible. No managerial text would be complete without some discussion of leadership. In this book it is fairly short, and hiding in amongst the usual, suggestions on the social aspects of leadership is a good suggestion that by thoroughly evaluating the expected result of a change, and presenting this evidence to colleagues, a leader might have better success with implementing changes. If this book does indeed present a framework for efficient service management, perhaps physicists already have a head start; the book might not be necessary. Mr Mark Worrall is a Clinical Scientist in Diagnostic Radiology and Radiation Protection (Radiation Physics) at Ninewells Hospital, Dundee, UK FACTORY PHYSICS FOR MANAGERS: HOW LEADERS IMPROVE PERFORMANCE IN A POST-LEAN SIX SIGMA WORLD EDWARD S. POUND, JEFFREY H. BELL, MARK L. SPEARMAN Publisher: McGraw-Hill Professional ISBN: 978-0071822503 Format: Hardback Number of pages: 354 Price: £32.99 TABLE 1 Usman I. Lula is a a Principal Clinical Scientist based in the Radiotherapy Planning section (Radiotherapy Physics QEMC) at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, UK. Email: usman.lula@uhb.nhs.uk 44 | MARCH 2015 | SCOPE Book title Reviewer n n n n n n Mark Worrall David Hall Julian Minns Angela Newing Julian Minns Malcolm Sperrin Factory Physics for Managers Bird of Passage – Recollections of a Physicist Heisenberg in the Atomic Age The Physics of Radiation Therapy Advanced Biomaterials and Biodevices Radiation Biology of Medical Imaging Reviews of textbooks published on medical physics, along with recently published books and new reports Bird of Passage – Recollections of a Physicist I nearly met Sir Rudolf Ernst Peierls – back in 1985 my college needed a speaker for our annual physics dinner, and the 78-yearold Peierls was suggested. At the same time, he was working on this entertaining and informative memoir, now republished through the Princeton Legacy Library. Born in Berlin in 1907, into a family of Jewish merchants, as a young theoretical physicist Peierls worked with all the greats of the early days of quantum mechanics. As well as physics, we hear about Heisenberg’s prowess at table tennis, Pauli’s sharp wit, Bloch’s slow and deliberate nature, Bohr’s odd turns of phrase, Fermi’s use of early mechanical calculators and Feynman’s skill at fixing them, Dirac’s kindness, and many others; one Christmas skiing trip included three future Nobel laureates! On a trip to Russia he met and married a young physics graduate, Eugenia (Genia) Nikolaevna Kannegiser. She came back with him to Zurich, but with political changes in Europe the newly married couple moved to England, living in Cambridge, Manchester and then Birmingham. Manchester in particular was very rundown in 1933, the food was awful, and the winter fogs would last for two or three days, during which you couldn’t see across the road. However, they found the local population to be warm and friendly – something which hasn’t changed! In 1940, the most important calculation of Peierl’s life was to show, with Otto Frisch, that a nuclear chain reaction could be possible if sufficient uranium-235 could be purified. As enemy aliens Peierls and Frisch weren’t initially allowed to be involved in the ensuing discussions, but common sense eventually prevailed, and from 1943 Peierls led the British delegation at Los Alamos, developing the nuclear bomb. This section of the book is particularly fascinating. After the war, he took up a Professorship in Birmingham. In 1945, a professorial salary could buy an 8bedroom house on an acre of land, and successful PhD students could get good academic jobs. A major negative side of this period was that women were still wives and secretaries, rarely scientists, and Peierls’ wife gave up physics without comment from him. Peierls also became active in the campaign against the arms race and the spread of nuclear weapons, through the Pugwash conferences, a reminder of Cold War days. This is an excellent book with far more in it than I can mention here, which I wholeheartedly recommend. Dr David Hall is Head of the Nuclear Medicine Physics Section, Department of Medical Physics and Bioengineering, University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, UK BIRD OF PASSAGE – RECOLLECTIONS OF A PHYSICIST SIR RUDOLF ERNST PEIERLS Publisher: Princeton University Press ISBN: 978-0-69160-220-2 Format: Softback Number of pages: 350 Price (publisher’s website): £41.95 Heisenberg in the Atomic Age This book is organised into four parts: Part I – Introduction, Part II – Culture, Part III – Politics and Part IV – Scientific reason in the public sphere, containing a total of 15 chapters. It is the most rigorously researched book that I have reviewed and has references quoted in the text, numbered for each chapter, as well as 57 pages of bibliography! The book is organised topically rather than chronologically, separating Heisenberg’s contribution to the culture of nuclear science research in pre- and post-war Germany, his political stance changes from the early part of his life to postwar modern Germany and his scientific reasoning in the public sphere throughout his professional life. Part I describes how he alone built up long-lasting scientific institutes defining science’s position as a public good under public supervision. The atmosphere in Germany before the rise of the Third Reich was an encouragement to play a major role in the development of fission research and production. Research of his unified field theory, the so-called ‘world formula’, resulted in him becoming a Nobel Laureate at the age of 32, in 1933. It was more difficult post war as there were still suspicions of the influence of the Third Reich in the place of science in the post-war public arena. Part II relates to his function as a cultural figure and he based his early model of the role of scientists in society by attending and giving public lectures to the educated middle classes. He stressed that he provided first and foremost a physicist, not a philosopher. After Hiroshima, the unmistakable power of science led him to claim a larger responsibility for scientists in public affairs. Practical rebuilding after World War II involved Heisenberg being responsible for the Max Planck Institute of Physics, the Max Planck Society and becoming head of the German Research Council. He was very concerned that West German nuclear technology might be diverted for military uses. Post war it was more difficult as there were still suspicions about the influence of the Third Reich in the role of science in the post-war arena. In 1946, after internment in Farm Hall in England, he returned ‰ SCOPE | MARCH 2015 | 45 BOOK REVIEWS renewing international ties, and in 1957 was instrumental in the production of the ‘Gottingen Manifesto’ following nuclearising the West German military, confirming his role as a public political spokesman. Professor Julian Minns is a Consultant Clinical Scientist and holds an Honorary Chair in Medical Implant Design, Product Design Research (PDR) Centre at Cardiff Metropolitan University, UK HEISENBERG IN THE ATOMIC AGE: SCIENCE AND THE PUBLIC SPHERE CATHRYN CARSON Publisher: Cambridge University Press ISBN: 978-0-521-82170-4 Format: Hardback Pages: 461 Price: £63 (US$99) The Physics of Radiation Therapy The first edition of Khan’s book with this title appeared in 1984, with subsequent editions 9, 10, 7 and now a further 4 years later. This last is jointly authored for the first time and both authors are respected senior figures in the American medical physics world. I was looking forward to seeing this most recent edition with updates on the latest developments in clinical and physical radiotherapy. The basic physics has been similar in all editions and Part 1 provides an excellent grounding for physicists and clinicians with clear text and diagrams. This section fills 132 pages. Each chapter, as with those throughout the book, ends with ‘Key points’ and a list of references. Some of the papers and books referred to are surprisingly old, which seems entirely reasonable for the basic physics which has changed little, but I was disappointed to find that most of the references at the ends of all chapters 46 | MARCH 2015 | SCOPE were also far from modern. Part 2 shows the reader the data required to begin external beam treatment planning and how to measure dose, isodose distributions and other measurements needed to prepare for patient treatment. It shows how to acquire patient outlines and details of such things as inhomogeneities. Photon and electron therapy are covered in great detail, as is low dose rate brachytherapy. Again I was surprised by history. Radium, as the first ever brachytherapy source, deserves a mention, but it has not been in use in hospitals for decades and hardly needs the dozen pages of text and diagrams devoted to radium dosimetry. Most of the other isotopes used for implantation are dealt with, including palladium-103 which is much more recent. There are also chapters on radiation protection and on quality assurance. Part 2 has 280 pages. Part 3 brings the reader up to date with conformal therapy, IMRT, stereotactic radiotherapy, high dose rate brachytherapy, intraoperative work and so on, and finishes with a very useful chapter on proton beam therapy. Like the rest of the book, this is well and clearly illustrated. “ “ ‰ to Germany to be a key figure in I recommend this volume particularly to newcomers to medical physics In spite of my criticisms, I recommend this volume particularly to newcomers to medical physics. I could have done with something like this many years ago when I started out. An added advantage is access to the complete contents online via a sticker on the inside front cover with a unique access code. Professor Angela Newing is a retired Director of Medical Physics for Gloucestershire NHS, UK THE PHYSICS OF RADIATION THERAPY (FIFTH EDITION) FAIZ M. KHAN, JOHN P. GIBBONS Publisher: Wolters Kluwer ISBN: 9-781451-182453 Format: Hardback Pages: 572 Price: £157 Advanced Biomaterials and Biodevices This second book in the ‘Advanced materials’ series is in two parts: (1) Cutting edge biomaterials and (2) Innovative biodevices. Most of the chapters rely heavily on the reader’s knowledge of materials at a nanometre level, and structures at the sub Angstrom level. The authors are based throughout the globe; six of the 15 chapters are produced from research conducted in India, none from the UK and only one from the USA. In Part 1, the first chapter describes the development and production of bulk nanostructural metals described by the Russian authors with 343 references quoted. Drug loading and release using stimuli-responsive materials are well described in the next chapter, and drug carriers using liposomes from the US researchers in Chapter 3. Nano shells and their application in targeted drug delivery are discussed in Chapter 4. I found the next two chapters in this book the most interesting, dealing with the use of Chitosan as an advanced healthcare material. The range of applications is very impressive, from its use as a drug delivery agent, for wound healing and tissue regeneration by forming scaffolds of the material, and as an antimicrobial carrier for wound dressings. Most impressively, it has been developed as a final coating for ophthalmic lenses, allowing them to move freely without adhering to the eye, and having antimicrobial properties in situ. The application of this antimicrobial property is expanded in the next chapter using low molecular weight Chitosan. Part 2, dealing with innovative biodevices, addresses the potential applications of the newer materials appearing in the market. This ranges from label-free biochips and sensors using microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) technology to customised Reviews of textbooks published on medical physics, along with recently published books and new reports biochips providing real-time data. A criticism one could level at the production of a multi-author book such as in this series is the variation in the number and quality of the figures, which when well produced can say a thousand words. Examples of the excellent use of diagrams are shown in Chapters 9 and 11, the latter describing molecular imprinting and nanotechnology. For instance, in describing ‘What is imprinting?’, a simple schematic diagram clarifies for the reader what is meant by the term. The other diagrams in this chapter are excellent but do require the reader to have a fundamental knowledge of chemistry. Overall, this is a fascinating series of diverse chapters, with a large range of quality in the presentation and in the diagrams, and the reader has to have an extensive knowledge of biochemistry and nanotechnology to really appreciate the cutting-edge technology presented in this book. Professor Julian Minns is a Consultant Clinical Scientist and holds an Honorary Chair in Medical Implant Design, Product Design Research (PDR) Centre at Cardiff Metropolitan University, UK ADVANCED BIOMATERIALS AND BIODEVICES ASHUTOSH TIWARI (series editor) Publisher: John Wiley ISBN: 9781118773635 Pages: 546 Price: £130 Radiation Biology of Medical Imaging This is a very comprehensive text that goes far beyond the content most would expect given the rather specific title. The introductory chapters concentrate on cell biology but as the book progresses, there is an increasing emphasis on radiation effects, and the important aspects of dose limits, regulation and environmental radiation exposure are also covered. There are some key aspects which make the text particularly appealing to the medical physics community. Radiobiology of radiographic imaging is a particularly interesting chapter, with a second chapter on nuclear medicine. Most readers would be surprised to find additional chapters on MRI and ultrasound but the inclusion of these final chapters emphasises the increasing awareness of risk mitigation in non-ionising radiation. The material is particularly well covered and has a lot to offer both the novice to the field and also those who have some degree of specialisation, although a greater reference and bibliography list would have been beneficial. The book would be very relevant to anyone working in fields that are impacted by radiation exposure, whether therapy or diagnostic, and also to the radiation protection community. Having an origin in the USA, one may expect the units to need converting but it is very helpful that the units used are those familiar to the UK (where exposures are in mSv) which further adds to the ease of reading this book. The layout is done in an intelligent manner with a liberal sprinkling of images, diagrams and tables, with some of the images reproduced in colour. The inclusion of colour certainly helps with understanding and interpreting the images and also reemphasises the overall quality. Whilst other texts certainly exist in this discipline, this volume presents complex and useful information in a manner that is particularly useful and for me, this is one of the best that I have come across. I can imagine that the book has a place in both the departmental library and also in the personal collection of those in the field. My only concern is that the quality will be degraded if the book is not regularly updated – this one is dated 2014. I can imagine a companion text looking more closely at the non- ionising aspects of exposure and such a text would be valuable if it matches the quality of this one. Professor Malcolm Sperrin is Director of Medical Physics at Royal Berkshire NHS Foundation Trust, Reading, UK RADIATION BIOLOGY OF MEDICAL IMAGING CHARLES KELSEY, PHILIP HEINTZ, GREGORY CHAMBERS, DANIEL SANDOVAL, NATALIE ADOLPHI, KIMBERLY PAFFETT Publisher: Wiley Blackwell ISBN: 978-0-470-55177-6 Format: Hardback Pages: 315 Price: £60.25 Just Published! Radiosensitizers and Radiochemotherapy in the Treatment of Cancer by Shirley Lehnert (Taylor & Francis) catalogues and describes the mechanism of action for entities characterised as radiosensitisers. The book addresses a range of topics from molecular oxygen and high Z elements to monoclonal antibodies and complex phytochemicals. Statistical Computing in Nuclear Imaging by Arkadiusz Sitek (Taylor & Francis) introduces aspects of Bayesian computing in nuclear imaging. It provides an introduction to Bayesian statistics and concepts and is highly focussed on the computational aspects of Bayesian data analysis of photon-limited data acquired in tomographic measurements. Biomedical Signals and Sensors II by Eugenijus Kaniusas (Springer) develops a bridge between physiologic mechanisms and diagnostic human engineering. This second volume is devoted to the interface between biosignals and biomedical sensors. This book is intended to have the presence to answer intriguing ‘Aha!’ questions. Computational Hemodynamics – Theory, Modelling and Applications by Jiyuan Tu, Kiao Inthavong and Kelvin Kian Loong Wong (Springer) discusses geometric and mathematical models that can be used to study fluid and structural mechanics in the cardiovascular system. This book is aimed at students and researchers ‰ SCOPE | MARCH 2015 | 47 Reviews of textbooks published on medical physics, along with recently published books and new reports ‰ wishing to engage in this emerging and exciting field of computational hemodynamics modelling. Digital Signal Processing for Medical Imaging Using Matlab by E. S. Gopi (Springer) describes medical imaging systems such as x-ray, computed tomography and MRI from the point of view of digital signal processing. It outlines the physics behind medical imaging required to understand the techniques being described. Matlab programs and illustrations are used whenever possible to reinforce the concepts being discussed. NEW REPORTS AND NEWSLETTERS Physics and Engineering of Radiation Detectors, 2nd Edition by Syed Naeem Ahmed (Elsevier) covers the origins and properties of different kinds of ionising radiation, their detection and measurement and the procedures used to protect people and the environment from their potentially harmful effects. There is also more material related to measurements in particle physics, together with a complete solutions manual. BOOK REVIEWS Science and Technology in the Global Cold War by Naomi Oreskes and John Krige (MIT Press) considers whether the new institutions and institutional arrangements that emerged globally constrained technoscientific inquiry or offered greater opportunities for it. The contributors find that whatever the particular science and whatever the political system in which that science was operating, the knowledge that was produced bore some relation to the goals of the nation-state. critical principles and new concepts in bioengineering, integrating the biological, physical and chemical laws and principles that provide a foundation for the field. Both biological and engineering perspectives are included, with key topics such as the physical–chemical properties of cells, tissues and organs; principles of molecules; composition and interplay in physiological scenarios; and the complex physiological functions of heart, neuronal cells, muscle cells and tissues. Quality Management in the Imaging Sciences by Jeffrey Papp (Mosby) provides a thorough description of quality management and explains why it is so important to imaging technology. Step-bystep QM procedures include full-size evaluation forms with instructions on how to evaluate equipment and document results. This book also helps you prepare effectively for the ARRT advanced certification exam in quality management. Departure by A. G. Riddle (Riddle Inc.). Harper Lane has problems. In a few hours, she’ll have to make a decision that will change her life forever. But when her flight from New York to London crashlands in the English countryside, she discovers that she’s made of tougher stuff than she ever imagined. As Harper and the survivors of Flight 305 struggle to stay alive in the aftermath of the crash, they soon realise that this world is very different from the one they left. Their lives are connected, and some believe they’ve been brought here for a reason. Bioengineering: A Conceptual Approach by Mirjana Pavlovic (Springer) explores n Potential Hazard Due to Induced Radioactivity Secondary to Radiotherapy. Report of Task Group 136 of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM). Health Physics 2014; 107(5). n ISO/TR 800001-2-6 ed1.0 (2014-11) – Application of Risk Management for IT-networks Incorporating Medical Devices. Part 2-6: Application Guidance – Guidance for Responsibility Agreements; 2014. n AAPM and GEC-ESTRO Guidelines for Image-guided Robotic Brachytherapy. Report of Task Group 192. Medical Physics 2014; 41(6). https://www.aapm.org/pubs/reports/RPT_176.pdf n NHS Scientist Training Programme. National School of Healthcare Science, Trainee Handbook; 2014. n Use of Water Equivalent Diameter for Calculating Patient Size and SizeSpecific Dose Estimates (SSDE) in CT. Report of AAPM Task Group 220; September 2014. https://www.aapm.org/pubs/reports/RPT_220.pdf n Justification of Practices, Including Non-medical Human Imaging. IAEA Safety Standard Series GSG-5, STI/PUB/1650; October 2014. http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Publications/PDF/Pub1650web-23654722.pdf n Strategies for the Management of Localized Prostate Cancer: A Guide for Radiation Oncologists. IAEA Human Health Reports No. 11; September 2014. http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Publications/PDF/Pub1646web-26036235.pdf n Human Health IAEA Publication Catalogue, 2014–2015. http://www-pub.iaea.org/books/SubjectBrochures/sb_hh.pdf n Safety Standards IAEA; September 2014. http://www-pub.iaea.org/books/SubjectBrochures/sb_ss.pdf n Radiotherapy Errors and Near Misses: Biennial Report. Public Health England, UK. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/f ile/380981/Biennial_report_no_3_.pdf https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_ data/file/342253/HPA-CRCE-035_data_report_on_radiotherapy_ errors_and_near_misses.pdf n Safer Radiotherapy: Summary of Error Data Quarterly Analysis. Issue 14; October 2014. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/f ile/368492/Safer_RT_No14_StdQ.pdf n Radiological Impact of Routine Discharges from UK Civil Nuclear Licensed Sites During 2000s. Radiation PHE-CRCE Report Series; November 2014. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/f ile/380103/PHE-CRCE-015.pdf n Radiation Protection in Nuclear Medicine. IPEM Report; 2014. 48 | MARCH 2015 | SCOPE n AESP Curriculum – Medical Physics Expert, v1.0. MSC Curricula; October 2014. n HSST Clinical Biomedical Engineering for 2014–15, v1.1. MSC Curricula; October 2014. n HSST Medical Physics for 2014–15, v1.1. MSC Curricula; October 2014. n HSST Doctoral Programme Specification, v1.1. MSC Curricula; December 2014. n IEC Newsletter No. 48 Q2-2014. Accident and Emergency Centre, IAEA; September 2014. http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Publications/PDF /Newsletters/IEC_48.pdf n Healthcare Science Newsletter. AHCS; October 2014. http://www.ahcs.ac.uk/news/vox-the-ahcs-newsletter/ n Medical Physics Newsletter. EFOMP; Summer 2014. http://www.efomp.org/index.php/efomp-publications/finish/3/459 n Medical Physics World Newsletter. IOMP; July 2014. http://www.iomp.org/sites/default/files/empw-2014-01_0.pdf n IPEM Scope; March 2014. http://www.ipem.ac.uk/Portals/0/Documents/Publications/SCOPE/SCOPE _MAR2014.pdf n A Public Consultation Guide – Investing in Specialised Services, NHS England, 2015. https://www.engage.england.nhs.uk/consultation/investing-inspecialised-commissioning n Medical Physics International, Nov 2014. http://mpijournal.org/pdf/2014-02/MPI-2014-02.pdf n MSC Accredited Expert Scientific Practice (AESP) Curriculum V1.0, Medical Physics Expert, Oct 2014. http://www.networks.nhs.uk/nhs-networks/msc-frameworkcurricula/documents/aesp-curriculum-medical-physics-expert-v1.0/view DR JONATHAN WHYBROW OBITUARY Dr Jonathan Whybrow Remembering a true and highly intelligent scientist one year after he tragically passed away Philip Niblett, Clinical Scientist and Head of Clinical Measurements he 29th November 2014 was the first anniversary of the death of Dr Jonathan ‘Jon’ Whybrow who continues to be greatly missed by his colleagues in the Department of Clinical Measurements and by others at the Royal Devon and Exeter NHS Foundation Trust where he was a respected healthcare scientist. Jon joined Clinical Measurements as a postgraduate trainee, having already enrolled on the Clinical Scientist Training Programme, completing his radiotherapy placement at Cheltenham General Hospital and his medical electronics and instrumentation placement at the Royal United Hospital, Bath. In 2002 Jon applied for a higher graded position than a trainee. His potential was identified and Jon continued his training, ultimately fulfilling the role that the post required. Jon had excellent credentials; an Honours degree in Physics (Imperial College), a Master of Science in Applied Radiation Physics with Medical Physics (University of Birmingham) and a Doctor of Philosophy in Medical Physics (University of Exeter). He was awarded the IPEM Diploma (September 2003), and subsequently his Clinical Scientist registration with the Health Professions Council. Jon was a true scientist and an exceptionally good ‘all round’ physiological measurement scientist, a highly intelligent person with a superb core grounding in many aspects of physics, mathematics and computing, and the rarer talent of understanding electronic design fundamentals. A team player, he had a great sense of fun and was interested in everybody and everything. Despite his huge knowledge base he would still seek advice and reassurance that his work practices were at an optimal level. His huge enthusiasm for training was utilised in mentoring students and enhancing the scientific team by being influential in the appointment of two trainee scientists. Jon’s achievements during 11 years in physiological measurements are extensive, with modifications to several physiological measurement devices and the introduction of computer applications designed T Dr Jonathan Whybrow January 1974 – November 2013 using his high levels of competency with various software programming tools. In his quality assurance role, he developed the ‘Whybrometer’ and associated pressure testing system specifically for the scientific evaluation of air-filled microballoon catheters (developed in Exeter for invasive physiological pressure measurement). Clinically Jon was responsible for the development of the gastro-oesophageal diagnostic service, consolidating the Bravo radiotelemetry technique for recording oesophageal pH and enhancing the manometry service by introducing high-resolution manometry and oesophageal impedance measurements. He implemented the home sleep study monitoring service and following his request he became competent in modalities of peripheral vascular ultrasound investigations, sadly his last clinical specialism. Jon’s professional desire was to ‘spread the word’ and raise the profile of physiological measurements. Being excited by the opportunity to raise the profile nationally he joined IPEM’s Physiological Measurement Special Interest Group, a role that remained unfulfilled. Jon was my right-hand man in all scientific developments and their medical applications, and a potential scientific successor in the department. I respected his knowledge and input, and his contribution to scientific and clinical publications and presentations undoubtedly cemented his professional legacy. We had many exciting discussions, sometimes meeting in the restaurant and enjoying a full cooked breakfast! There wasn’t time to achieve all that we wanted to and even during his final illness he reminded me of the numerous uncompleted and potential projects. A colleague recalled that Jon once remarked to the trainees, ‘don’t let those physiologists lead you up the garden path’ – his way of reminding them to remain true to their scientific principles! It is so regrettable that Jon’s longstanding medical condition unexpectedly took this very talented clinical scientist from us far too early. Jon left a wife Caitlin (also a clinical scientist) and three young children: Elliot, Ethan and Natasha. SCOPE | MARCH 2015 | 49 Images © Shutterstock/khuruzero HISTORICAL FEATURE: A HISTORY OF BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING PART 5: from the BES to the IPEM Stanley Salmons concludes his historical feature series: the discipline gains recognition, journals are established, and BES merges with IPEM T semiconductor technology had made it possible to build circuits that were not only small but could operate from low voltages and without the need for heater circuits. Initially such circuits were straightforward adaptations of valve equivalents, using germanium p-n-p transistors in the common-emitter configuration. Soon silicon transistors appeared, with an n-p-n construction. Later, with the introduction of silicon p-n-p transistors, complementary pairs of transistors could be used in configurations for which there were no earlier valve equivalents (figure 1 is an example). The space race, famously presaged by Russia’s Sputnik and President J.F. Kennedy’s declaration of intent to go to the Moon, stimulated the electronics industry to produce ever more miniaturised components. These were pounced upon by biomedical engineers. The first implantable devices appeared: cardiac pacemakers and radiotelemetry pills1 for medical use, and the first totally implantable neuromuscular stimulator (figure 1), which would open up a new chapter in muscle physiology and clinical applications.2–6 The advent of implantable devices focused attention on the need for biocompatible materials and methods of encapsulation that would prevent the ingress of water. At the opposite end of the scale were developments in large apparatus: x-ray machines, linear accelerators, gamma cameras, radioisotope scanners, ultrasound equipment, and the instrumented chambers needed to study human physiology. Accompanying these studies was an increasing adoption of digital methods of recording and data logging. The Society’s activities Although the establishment of the International Federation for Medical Electronics (IFME) had provided the initial stimulus for the formation of a national society, the Biological Engineering Society (BES) did not, at first, affiliate itself. Once again, the Council had felt that the title ‘Medical Electronics’ was too restrictive. However, at the 5th International Conference on Medical Electronics, held in Liège, Belgium, in July 1963, a proposition from the UK delegates was accepted, and it was agreed that the name of the Federation should be changed to the International Federation for Medical Electronics and Biological Engineering (IFMEBE). Affiliation of the BES followed. Subsequently, at the 6th International Conference held in Tokyo in ‰ t he new Biological Engineering Society (BES) settled into a pattern of meetings designed to familiarise members with each other’s work whilst spanning the entire discipline. The usual format was to have communications in the morning and demonstrations in the afternoon. These meetings were attractive not only for the variety of subject matter but for the informal mix of mature research on the one hand and speculative research on the other. This encouraged lively discussion and the exchange of ideas. The main meetings were interspersed with more specialised symposia hosted by members. The first of these, on radio pills, was hosted by Heinz S. Wolff at the Bioengineering Laboratory, MRC Hampstead, London, on 28th October 1961. Subsequent meetings took place at a variety of venues: hospital or university departments; the Royal College of Art, Kensington; research centres such as the Physiological Laboratory, Cambridge, and the National College of Agricultural Engineering, Silsoe; government research establishments such as the RAF Institute of Aviation, Farnborough, the Royal Naval Physiological Laboratory, Portsmouth, the Water Pollution Research Laboratory, Stevenage, and Rothamstead Experimental Station; and industrial research establishments such as the Vickers Group Research Establishment, Sunninghill, and Shell Research, Sittingbourne. This was a time of rapid progress in medicine and engineering, including that made in replacement heart valves, the artificial kidney, blood pumps, measurement of blood flow, fracture fixation, highpressure oxygen therapy and gait recording. Britain was making nuclear submarines and fast aircraft, and there was a demand for more work in radiation physics and radiation monitoring, and on the physiological effects of sudden exposure to high barometric pressures (as in escape from submarines) and low atmospheric pressures (as in failure of pressurisation or the need to eject at high altitudes). Although these developments found a ready forum at the BES, there was always room for more biological topics, such as the measurement of the peak tension in the extensor muscle of the locust during a jump, by R.H.J. Brown, Zoological Laboratory, Cambridge (for interest, it was 1.5 kg). There was therefore no lack of applications but engineering, too, was developing rapidly. The spread of The first implantable devices appeared SCOPE | MARCH 2015 | 51 HISTORICAL FEATURE: A HISTORY OF BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING t Image © By kind permission of Professor N. de N. Donaldson FIGURE 1. The first totally implantable neuromuscular stimulator2 FIGURE 2. P.E.K. Donaldson t 52 | MARCH 2015 | SCOPE ‰ 1965, the General Assembly decided to drop Electronics from the name altogether on the grounds that it was included in Engineering, and the title became, and remains, International Federation for Medical and Biological Engineering (IFMBE). By the end of 1965 the BES had over 240 members. It had representatives on the Parliamentary Scientific Committee, the Biological Council, and SAMB (the United Kingdom Liaison Committee for Sciences Allied to Medicine and Biology), which had been formed that October to provide co-ordination between relevant professional bodies. Following the December 1965 meeting on prostheses in Glasgow, the first regional section, the Scottish Section, was formed. Once affiliated to the IFMBE, the Society supported each of the Federation’s international conferences with papers and a British stand of scientific and commercial exhibits. Over the period from 1971 to 1985 the Federation grew from 15 member societies to 28. Meanwhile BES meetings had also been expanded to accommodate more special topic conferences: Blood Flow Measurement; Education, Training and Careers in Bio-Medical Engineering; and Biomaterials. Publications generated by these conferences proved popular. Other conferences were confined to three topics related to local interests. There was a growing demand for these more specialised meetings, which led to a second Biomaterials conference (held jointly with the Hospital Physicists Association), and meetings on Technical Aspects of Renal Dialysis, Foetal and Neonatal Physiological Measurements, and Telemetry and Radio Tracking. The last attracted over 300 delegates and resulted in an 800-page book.7 The role of biomedical engineering in both research and the provision of services now had national status. In his introduction to a special issue of the Health and Social Service Journal/Hospital International, 1975, the then Minister of State (Health), Dr David Owen, wrote: ‘The contents of this publication confirm that biomedical engineering contributes to almost all specialties and is in evidence at the bedside, in the laboratories and in clinical departments and operating theatres… I do not think the importance of biomedical engineering can be overstressed…’ The Society’s 15th anniversary was celebrated with a conference in Edinburgh in August 1975. His Royal Highness Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, graciously consented to be its patron. He was afterwards invited to be patron of the Society, an invitation he declined, whilst adding that he would, however, be delighted to become an Honorary Member. The BES Council duly elected the Society’s first Honorary Member. The professional interests of Society members were not being neglected. As early as 1965, discussions had commenced with the Council of Engineering Institutions (CEI) and after a number of rigorous assessments the Society was admitted as an Affiliate, enabling appropriately qualified members of engineering professions to apply for registration as Chartered Engineers through the BES. When the government replaced the CEI with the Engineering HISTORICAL FEATURE: A HISTORY OF BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING Council the Society’s affiliation was transferred. The Society created an additional grade of Technical Membership, through which members in that category could register with the Engineering Council as Technician Engineers. It also achieved alignment with the IFMBE’s Clinical Engineering Division objectives of examination and certification of members as Clinical Engineers. The IFMBE became a full member of the International Council of Scientific Unions in 2002, completing the goal of the founding members to achieve recognition and respect for the discipline of biomedical engineering. “ “ His style was a delightful combination of the kitchensink experiment and the utmost rigour Journals In 1963 the IFMBE had founded a journal, Medical Electronics and Biological Engineering, with Alfred Nightingale as its first Editor, a tenure cut short by his fatal accident. The Administrative Council then offered the editorship to Peter E.K. Donaldson (figure 2). The choice was a felicitous one; by now Donaldson’s 1958 book, Electronic Apparatus for Biological Research, was frequently found on the shelves of physiologists and engineers on both sides of the Atlantic,8 his name was on the first list of members of the BES, and he had been elected to Council at the first Annual General Meeting. He went on to build the journal’s reputation over the crucial first 5 years. Donaldson’s own research and that of his colleagues in the MRC Neurological Prosthesis Unit of the Institute of Psychiatry was to prove highly influential in the development of microelectronic implants, not least in tackling the problems of tissue compatibility and water ingress mentioned earlier. His style was a delightful combination of the kitchen-sink experiment and the utmost intellectual rigour. This is well illustrated by his discovery of the suitability of silicone rubber as an implantable sealant:9 ‘About that time the inside of my domestic coffee percolator came to pieces. Looking along the workshop shelf at home for some adhesive with which to carry out a repair, I found the remains of a tube of Dow Corning bathtub sealant, an acetic-acid-evolving silicone rubber adhesive. I used this to mend the percolator, and the mend lasted, withstanding a daily boil of 5 min or so. At the time of writing, 8 years later, that mend is still being boiled daily and is still good. Evidently here was a promising material for an implant sealant.’ Over the years this casual observation would be subjected to detailed experimentation and analysis.10–13 The title of the Federation’s journal soon changed to Medical and Biological Engineering and in January 1977, with the minimum of fanfare, it was extended to Medical and Biological Engineering and Computing. From January 2006 the bimonthly publication was expanded to 12 issues a year. The BES had begun to issue a newsletter in January 1966, with A.S. Velate as its first Editor. But it also wanted its own journal, and in 1966 launched the monthly Bio-Medical Engineering. This succeeded in providing articles that were accessible to the broad interests of its readership, whilst leaving the Federation’s journal to cover the more scholarly and esoteric material. In January 1973 the journal took on a new look, adopting the metric format and a brand new cover design – and losing its hyphen. Following a dispute over the ownership of the title, the publication was reborn in 1979 as the Journal of Biomedical Engineering. In January 1994, under the editorship of V.C. Roberts, the name was changed yet again to Medical Engineering & Physics. This was a controversial decision, implying an emphasis on medicine as opposed to biology, and producing a dip in readership numbers for several years as well as a change in content. The journal now accepted far more specialised papers, overlapping to a much greater extent with the Federation journal. The merger The BES had grown in the 30 years since its foundation. It had a home in the Royal College of Surgeons, which had hosted its initial stages of formation. However, with the steady growth in membership came an increasing administrative burden, which had been managed over the years only through the goodwill and hard work of its Honorary Officers and members of Council. A critical point had been reached: it was too large to manage informally, yet too small to support paid staff. To solve the problem, consultations began with societies having allied interests. The Society had held many joint meetings with the Hospital Physicists Association (HPA) over the years, starting in 1966, and as early as 1973 discussions had taken place as to ways in which the two organisations could benefit from closer cooperation and a possible merger. Some 20 years later these discussions were revived with a greater sense of purpose. There were more joint meetings with the Institute of Physical Sciences in Medicine (IPSM), and a 4th Annual Joint Conference in Keele in 1994. After a 5th and final Joint Conference in Sheffield in 1995, the Institute of Physics and Engineering in Medicine and Biology (IPEMB) was formed by the merger of the HPA, BES, IPSM and Association of Medical Technologists. Two years later, ‘Biology’ was dropped from the title, which became the Institute of Physics and Engineering in Medicine (IPEM). The future? By the end of the nineteenth century the era of the polymath was over, and science and engineering had become increasingly specialised. In the same way, it has become harder for societies that once aspired to encompass entire disciplines to do so. This trend has already been observed in the BES in the popularity of its special topic meetings. But each new imaging, ‰ ‘ FEEDBACK Scope welcomes your feedback! @IPEMScope SCOPE | MARCH 2015 | 53 HISTORICAL FEATURE: A HISTORY OF BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING ‰ measuring, or monitoring technique and each ‘ Stanley Salmons is Emeritus Professor of Applied Myology at the University of Liverpool. Although still scientifically active, he is carving out a second career in fiction writing. He is a Fellow of IPEM and an Honorary Fellow of the Anatomical Society. new treatment modality seems to generate the urge to create yet more focused meetings, a more specific forum and a new journal, threatening to remove those interests from the relevant parent organisation. This trend has the disadvantage of restricting the breadth of vision and interaction across subject boundaries that is afforded by membership of a less specialised body. It is fortunate that the IFMBE allows more than one society per country to be a member, as this at least creates an opportunity to assemble the fragmented groups beneath a single umbrella. The potential is undiminished for a convergence between engineering and physics on the one hand and biology and medicine on the other, but the collaboration needs to be a two-way process. Biologists and physicians know best what they need, and engineers and physicists are best equipped to provide it, but dialogue calls for a breadth of understanding from both parties. An almost exclusive emphasis on medical applications has moved the IPEM further away from the initial goal of encompassing biology. Yet the problems facing the world are not merely those of the health of its human population but the health of the planet. Climate change, overfishing of the oceans, deforestation, and the consequences of other commercial activities are all reflected in the animals that must share those resources. Engineering techniques can help to study and to monitor these effects, but once again specialisation tends to isolate those whose interests should be overlapping. Over 50 years ago the Biological Engineering Society met this need for a group of individuals who laid the foundations of the discipline, and it promoted crossfertilisation through broadly based scientific meetings. There is a need to find ways of preserving this vision if biomedical engineering is to realise its full potential in the future. REFERENCES 1 Rowlands EN, Wolff HS. The radio pill – telemetering from the digestive tract. Br Commun Electron 1960; 7: 598–601. 2 Salmons S. An implantable muscle stimulator. J Physiol 1967; 188: 13–14P. 3 Salmons S, Sréter FA. Significance of impulse activity in the transformation of skeletal muscle type. Nature 1976; 263: 30–34. 4 Salmons S. Cardiac assistance from skeletal muscle: a reappraisal. Eur J Cardio-Thorac Surg 2009; 35: 204–13. 5 Salmons S. Adaptive change in electrically stimulated muscle: a framework for the design of clinical protocols (Invited review). Muscle Nerve 2009; 40: 918–35. 6 Salmons S, Henriksson J. The adaptive response of skeletal muscle to increased use. Muscle Nerve 1981; 4: 94–105. 7 Amlaner CJ, MacDonald DW (Ed.). A Handbook of Biotelemetry and Radiotracking. Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1980. 8 Donaldson PEK. Electronic Apparatus for Biological Research. London: Butterworths Scientific Publications, 1958. 9 Donaldson PEK. In search of the reliable microelectronic implant. Trends Neurosci 1978; 1: 49–50. 10 Donaldson PEK. Aspects of silicone rubber as an encapsulant for neurological prostheses. Part 1: osmosis. Med Biol Eng Comput 1991; 29: 34–9. 11 Donaldson PEK. Aspects of silicone rubber as encapsulant for neurological prostheses. Part 3: adhesion to mixed oxides. Med Biol Eng Comput 1995; 33: 725–7. 12 Donaldson PEK. Aspects of silicone rubber as encapsulant for neurological prostheses. Part 4: twopart rubbers. Med Biol Eng Comput 1997; 35: 283–6. 13 Donaldson PEK, Aylett BJ. Aspects of silicone rubber as encapsulant for neurological prostheses. Part 2: adhesion to binary oxides. Med Biol Eng Comput 1995; 33: 285–92. SCOPE VACANCIES Clinical Technologist News Editor Are you passionate about Clinical Technology? Would you like to make a regular contribution to Scope and volunteer your time for the benefit of the Medical Physics and Clinical Engineering community? We have an immediate vacancy for: n an enthusiastic Clinical Technologist News Editor to join the IPEM Scope Editorial Team (3 year term in office). Applications are invited from all voting members (Fellows, Members and Associates) To discuss the role please contact Usman Lula (Editor-in-Chief of IPEM Scope magazine) Email: (usman.lula@uhb.nhs.uk) Or email the IPEM office: office@ipem.ac.uk 54 | MARCH 2015 | SCOPE CENTURY ONE PUBLISHING IS THE UK’S BRIGHTEST AWARD-WINNING CONTRACT PUBLISHING AND ADVERTISING SALES AGENCY. WE WORK EXCLUSIVELY MSc in Neuroimaging DDQGLQWHUSUHWLQJGDWDWKLV06F QGLQWHUSUHWLQJGDWDWKLV06F SURYLGHVFRPSUHKHQVLYHWUDLQLQJ S URYLGHVFRPSUHKHQVLYHWUDLQLQJ LLQWKHVFLHQFHDQGPHWKRGRORJ\ QWKHVFLHQFHDQGPHWKRGRORJ\ RIQHXURLPDJLQJWHFKQLTXHVDQG R IQHXURLPDJLQJWHFKQLTXHVDQG WWKHLUDSSOLFDWLRQWRQHXURVFLHQFH KHLUDSSOLFDWLRQWRQHXURVFLHQFH SV\FKRORJ\SV\FKLDWU\QHXURORJ\ S V\FKRORJ \SV\FKLDWU\QHXURORJ\ DDQGEH\RQG QGEH\RQG Join a one yyear ear Master progr programme amme at King’s College London’s Institute of Psychiatry, Psychiatry, PPsychology sychology and Neuroscience (IoPPN), one of the world’s world’s largest post-gr post-graduate aduate teaching and research centres for for studying the brain brain in health and illness. Ţ Ţ $OOOHFWXUHVDUHJLYHQE\H[SHUWVLQ $OOOHFWXUHVDUHJLYHQE\H[SHUWVLQ WKHLUƩHOGSURYLGLQJVWXGHQWVZLWKLQ WKHLUƩHOGSURYLGLQJVWXGHQWVZLWKLQ GHSWKNQRZOHGJHDFURVVWKHVSHFWUXP G HSWKNQRZOHGJHDFURVVWKHVSHFWUXP RIQHXURLPDJLQJVSHFLDOLVPV R IQHXURLPDJLQJVSHFLDOLVPV Ţ Ţ .LQJśV&ROOHJH/RQGRQśV .LQJśV&ROOHJH/RQGRQśV 1HXURLPDJLQJGHSDUWPHQWKDV 1 HXURLPDJLQJGHSDUWPHQWKDV SLRQHHUHGZRUNLQIXQFWLRQDO S LRQHHUHGZRUNLQIXQFWLRQDO 05,GLƨXVLRQWHQVRULPDJLQJ 0 5,GLƨXVLRQWHQVRULPDJLQJ SKDUPDFRORJLFDO05,((*DQG S KDUPDFRORJLFDO05,((*DQG DGYDQFHGSK\VLFVLPDJH DGYDQFHGSK\VLFVLPDJH DDQDO\VLVWHFKQLTXHV QDO\VLVWHFKQLTXHV ŢŢ )URPLPDJLQJSK\VLFVVWXG\LQJUDUH )URPLPDJLQJSK\VLFVVWXG\LQJUDUH SDWLHQWSRSXODWLRQVDQGUXQQLQJ S DWLHQWSRSXODWLRQVDQGUXQQLQJ VVFDQQLQJVHVVLRQVWRDQDO\VLQJ FDQQLQJVHVVLRQVWRDQDO\VLQJ )RUPRUHLQIRUPDWLRQ ) RUPRUHLQIRUPDWLRQ 7KHFRXUVHLVDLPHGDWDSSOLFDQWV ŢŢ 7 KHFRXUVHLVDLPHGDWDSSOLFDQWV ZLWKDJRRGƩUVWGHJUHHIURPDZLGH Z LWKDJRRGƩUVWGHJUHHIURPDZLGH YDULHW\RIEDFNJURXQGVLQFOXGLQJ Y DULHW\RIEDFNJURXQGVLQFOXGLQJ PDWKHPDWLFVSK\VLFVHQJLQHHULQJ P DWKHPDWLFVSK\VLFVHQJLQHHULQJ RPSXWHUVFLHQFHELRPHGLFDO FFRPSXWHUVFLHQFHELRPHGLFDO VVFLHQFHVQHXURVFLHQFHDQG FLHQFHVQHXURVFLHQFHDQG SV\FKRORJ\ S V\FKRORJ\ www.msc-neuroimaging.com www w.msc-neuroimaging.com . msc-neuroimaging@k msc-neuroimaging@kcl.ac.uk cl.ac.uk WITH MEMBERSHIP ORGANISATIONS GENERATING ADVERTISING REVENUES AND MANAGING ALL OR PART OF THE PUBLISHING FUNCTION To plan your ad campaign in Scope magazine contact: David Murray t: 01727 739 182 e: d.murray@centuryonepublishing.uk w: www.centuryonepublishing.uk Barts Water The original plastic water substitute material - 2008 prices held - 5% discount as of April 2015 - No VAT added to all NHS Trusts in England Custom designs and standard sheets Water and Tissue Substitute A range of plastic materials, equivalent to water and various tissues, which can be used for simulations in photon and electron applications. Available in sheets, individually machined to exacting specifications. Chamber cavities are precision cast or machined. Tissue substitute can be used alone or with Barts Water as in IPSM phantom or custom phantoms. For details please contact: nigel.wellock@bartshealth.nhs.uk tel: +44 (0)20 3594 7351 / 6593 Bolus Bags A soft comfortable muscle or water substitute material for use in megavoltage radiotherapy. The material is supplied in standard and custom sized bags, which are durable, flexible and easy to clean. The gel type filling has the ability to retain moulding shape or be used in layers. HE ALT H PH YSIC S NUCLEAR M EDICINE D IA G N O STIC R A D IO L O G Y RA D I AT I O N T H E R A P Y Smarter Moves. Turnkey Solution for 4D Patient and Machine QA Smarter. Faster. Easier. The Checkerboard Detector OCTAVIUS® 1500 ` More detectors ` Better resolution ` Best field coverage NEW ` Modular – various detector arrays to choose from ` True 3D – measurements inside the entire phantom volume ` Truly isotropic – detector always perpendicular to the beam ` H ighest detector density, largest field coverage – better error detection ` TPS-independent, patient-based DVH analysis ` Optional machine QA with FFF analysis WWW.OCTAVIUS4D.COM USA | LATIN AMERICA | CHINA | ASIA PACIFIC | INDIA | UK | FRANCE | IBERIA | GERMANY Knowing what responsibility means