Radiotherapy Treatment Chart Sample - DOC

Document Sample
Radiotherapy Treatment Chart Sample - DOC Powered By Docstoc

    In collaboration with
Cancer Services Collaborative
    Cancer Action Team

         Version 2

                           Last updated 10.01.03

                            Working Version 5.1

BACKGROUND……………………………………………………………………………………………….. 3
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE TOOLKIT……………………………………………………………… 4
  AIM……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 4
  OBJECTIVES………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 4
KEY CONTACTS……………………………………………………………………………………………… 4
DEFINITIONS………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 5
   PROCESSES………………………………………………………………………………………………. 7
OTHER USEFUL SOURCES AND DOCUMENTS……………………………………………………….. 24
APPENDICES…………………………………………………………………………………………………. 25

Key contacts
The team, which has been established to develop and take forward the recommended approach
outlined within this toolkit, includes:

Angie Craig, CSC Radiotherapy National Project Manager
Email: Tel: 0116 2225112     Mobile 07900 223352

Peter Kirkbride, CSC Radiotherapy National Clinical Lead
Email: Tel: 0114 2265000

Trevor Roberts, CSC Radiotherapy National Clinical Lead
Email: Tel: 0191 2194280

Barbara Zutshi, CSC Regional Facilitator, South East
Email: Tel: 07900223136

Claire Henry, CSC Associate National Director
Email:        Tel: 0116 222 1415

Sue Bates, Programme Manager, Cancer Action Team
Email:        Tel: 020 7960 5886

The Cancer Services Collaborative (CSC) is working with cancer networks across the country to
redesign services, cut waits and improve experiences for patients and carers.

The goal of the CSC is:

“To improve the experience and outcome of care for people with suspected or diagnosed cancer by
improving the way in which care is delivered”

The NHS Cancer Plan states very clearly that new investment in staff and equipment needs to be
accompanied by reform. Many of the improvements made as part of the CSC programme have been
achieved with relatively little new resources. The main focus has been time and support so that teams
can look at the way care is delivered and see how these systems can be improved.
This has shown that it is possible to reduce waiting times for diagnosis and treatment, that care for
cancer patients can be booked at every stage of their journey and that patient experience of care can
be greatly improved by their involvement.

As the CSC programme has progressed, key parts of the patient journey have been highlighted as
major bottlenecks, one of which is radiotherapy. A national project has been established to address
the unique problems in this area.

As a programme, we are acutely aware of the problems facing cancer patients when they need
radiotherapy. Long waits and poor communication are commonly reported problems from both
patients and referring services. We are also conscious of the impact working towards government
access targets could have on radiotherapy services.

Radiotherapy is a complex, multi-step process, involving many staff groups and access to limited
resources (staff and equipment). Before attempting to redesign any service it is essential to establish
what the current situation is. Often, the perception of what is happening within the service is based on
limited data, which can often mask the real situation.

Access to radiotherapy depends on many factors, not least the availability of linear accelerators and
trained staff to operate them. Initiatives to increase both the number of treatment machines and staff
will eventually ease the pressure, but new ways of working are also necessary.

Traditionally we have used activity data and waiting times to indicate how hard our service is working.
As an indicator of the amount of work done, activity figures are a good measure. Their drawback is
they give no indication of the current demand for the service, any fluctuations, or the available
capacity to perform the activity. The activity may have been performed easily within the working day,
or the day may have had to be extended, or ad-hoc overtime worked to cope.

A waiting list can form over a very short period in time if the routine service is disrupted, or variations
in demand occur. If a waiting list is constant, it is just acting as a delay buffer to patients trying to
access service.

This toolkit has been designed to help teams look across the whole treatment system to identify the
true constraints in the process and explore how we can better understand the demand on our
services, it’s complexity and how that affects our capacity and waiting times.

The radiotherapy project focuses on a number of measures can be undertaken to identify the real

   Map the patients journey through radiotherapy (identifying any constraints)
   Identify the true demand for the service
   Identify the actual capacity you have available
   Are they balanced?
   Look at demand management and streamlining before creating extra capacity
   Form an action plan for redesign

The first stage began in January 2002, with teams invited to bid for £6K to fund a 2 month snap-shot
of capacity, demand backlog and activity data. This was to inform a redesign action plan for their
service. 45 out of 54 UK radiotherapy departments, covering 33 out of 34 cancer networks in England
took part.

The work is co-ordinated nationally by a steering group, with the focus very much being team driven.
We have held 3 well attended workshops to date, providing opportunities for radiotherapy teams to
meet and share their progress/problems, benchmark and collaborate on common issues. The project
is also linked to nominated CSC regional and network personnel, plus regular open forum conference
calls for support.

Utilise other initiatives:

College of Radiographers/DOH education and professional development (EPD) pilot
Changing Workforce Programme – Accelerated Development Programme for Radiography
Booking Programme – Access, Booking and Choice
Cottier review of radiotherapy services
Cancer Action Team – Peer Review Process
Cancer Dataset implementation
National patients survey
Local initiatives

Aims and Objectives of the toolkit


To improve Radiotherapy Services for patients by giving radiotherapy teams the skills to map,
analyse, streamline and redesign their processes, in partnership with the Cancer Services
Collaborative (CSC) programme and other local modernisation initiatives.

1.   To establish high level support for service redesign
2.   To map and analyse the patient process (including referral pathways)
3.   To ensure the patient experience is the focus of service delivery
4.   To define, group and time patient templates (using the Health Resource Groups-HRGs)
5.   To identify the issues around access and patient choice
6.   To undertake a demand and capacity audit.
7.   To develop and implement an action plan for service redesign
8.   To use methods of measuring:
      to monitor the impact of any service redesign
      to detect changes in demand and complexity of workload and plan for its impact

This toolkit sets out the recommended approach. Associated tools are provided in electronic format to
assist in the data collection, data analysis, and effective e-communication of the emerging themes.

The toolkit is set out as series of challenges, which if followed, will enable departments to gather clear
data about service demand and complexity. This, in conjunction with service mapping, will highlight
areas‟, that would benefit from service or process redesign.

 Demand                                   The number of referrals being made to the service.
                                          Demand measures need to be comprehensive capturing all
                                          referrals to the service, including new patients, replans,
                                          emergency and subsequent treatments.
 Complexity                               Groups similar patient based activities into common
                                          process templates to allow a measure of the impact of
                                          combined activities on global departmental workload (using
                                          common HRG templates is recommended)
 Capacity                                 Resources available in terms of equipment, space, staff and
                                          skills to operate the equipment/run the facilities
 Bottleneck                               The spot in the patient pathway where hold-ups occur. It is
                                          used when the cause of the hold-up is not yet clear
 Constraint                               The “thing” holding up flow of activity and causing the
 Carve Out                                Practice of “protecting” slots on lists for particular
                                          appointment types. For example protecting slots for
                                          emergency patients, whole sessions allocated to individual
                                          consultants, etc.
 Backlog                                  Is the number of patients for which referral has been made,
                                          but the patient has not yet been treated.
 Activity                                 Refers to the work done, often expressed as the number of
                                          patients treated or exposures given.

To allow comparison of any data, it needs to be collected (or converted) into a common unit. The unit
suggested is time.
Therefore, a representative, easily achievable time value should be assigned to each step/process in
the patient pathway/template. Process times should be based on what is comfortably achievable for
the majority (80%) of patients and grouped by HRG template.

Eg. For a simple + simulation patient
 The treatment step would be similar if the patient was having a hip, chest or breast treated.
 The treatment time is from when the staff call / greet the patient until the patient leaves the room
 Ignore the very quick and very long patients (eg hoisted / wheelchair / unwell) and base the time
    for that template / process on what happens most or 80% of the time

Details on how to establish this time mathematically, and how to calculate demand, capacity, backlog
and process templates are shown in the following challenges.

Challenge One: Identify Strategic Support and Clinical Leadership

One of the keys to successful service improvement is:

       ensuring the work is “sponsored” by senior management in the organisation
       that the improvement objectives are signed off by the “sponsor”
       that progress monitoring is agreed with a clear timetable

Appendix one provides a template that may be helpful in identifying and gaining commitment from key
stakeholders and sponsors in your organisation. This is important if the work invested in your service
improvement project is to result in sustainable improvements in patients access, improvements
working conditions for staff in the unit, and better data to inform future service development.

Some key areas you may need to establish:

   Who is identified as the Clinical and Managerial Lead for Radiotherapy services?
             Are they able to make change happen?
             Is there local support to aid service improvement – for example, Local Modernisation
                Review Lead, Clinical Audit, IT, Booked Admissions, Cancer Services Collaborative,
             Is it possible to get an executive or non-executive director to act as “sponsor” for
                Service Improvement?

   Is there a radiotherapy user group in place (as per peer review 5.23)
              Does the membership reflect the key stakeholders – including senior management,
                 clinicians, radiography, etc.?
              Are there clear terms of reference for that group?
              How does action planning and progress with service redesign get on to the agenda?
              Does the group influence Trust planning priorities?

Peer review (5.23)
There should be a group for the department which includes, at least, a Medical Physics Expert*, a
superintendent therapy radiographer and a clinical oncologist, which meets regularly to agree to and
record proposed new or changed treatment techniques on behalf of the department.
Membership of the group and Terms of Reference of the group, are both agreed by the head of

*As defined by the Ionising Radiation (Medical Exposures Regulations 2000 (IRMER 2000) a Medical
Physics Expert is one possessing a Physics Degree and with six year experience in radiotherapy.

Challenge Two: Understand the Current Service - Map and Analyse Patient Processes

   Referral mapping

Patients access the service from many referral points. In understanding current demand, it is
important to ensure a comprehensive referral map is identified that reflects accurately all points of
referral into radiotherapy.

   Identifying the radiotherapy referral map

The first step in detailing a comprehensive referral map is to:

   Clarify ALL the Trusts/hospitals that refer into your service.
   Identify any groups of patients for which you receive referrals on a regional, national or out of
    network basis (eg. CHART, TBI)
   Have ALL entry points for Radiotherapy referrals been clearly identified? Consider for example:
              What type of GP referrals exist, if any?
              What types of outpatient referrals are made (from where, who)?
              What types of in-patient referrals are made (emergency, out of hours, others)?
              Do the referrals come into a single central point?
              Is there a pattern to the receipt of referrals (eg day of the week)?
              How are follow-up/recurrence patients “referred”?

N.B. it is important to identify if radiotherapy is performed in areas other than the main radiotherapy
department (eg. satellite superficial units). All referrals need to be captured for the demand data to
give meaningful information for current and future service planning

Appendix 2 provides an example of presenting a referral map. This allows key stakeholders to check
that all referral routes are reflected.

   Mapping the existing patient pathway

Process mapping, although a simple exercise is one of the most powerful ways for a multi-disciplinary
group to identify and understand the real problems in a service from the patient‟s perspective.

Analysis by the NHS Modernisation Agency has shown that:

                Typically, 30 to 70 per cent of the work in a patient process doesn‟t add any value for
                Around 90% of the errors, duplication and delay in patient processes are at the point
                 of “hand-off” – where responsibility for the patient is handed from one professional,
                 department or agency to another. Up to 50% of the steps in a typical NHS patient
                 process involves a “hand-off”;
                Usually, no-one is responsible for the patient‟s journey through the care process and
                 patients often receive care which is fragmented and subject to delays.

   How to construct a process map for your project:

The objectives of this are to:

       Help everyone to understand what the patient is currently experiencing;
       Identify the stages in the process causing the problems in relation to achieving NHS cancer
        plan targets and wider NHS targets.

   Preparation:
     Define and agree how to capture the process for the different groups of patients being
     Subdivide the patients into groups according to complexity of the process (using HRG groups
       - see challenge 4). There will be common parts to the map with some stages where it needs
       to be captured separately for each group defined.
     Define and agree what the first and last step of the process is – for radiotherapy to obtain a
       complete picture the process starts at point of referral to the Oncologist through to follow-up;
     Be careful not to limit the scope unnecessarily;
     Identify all staff groups within the scope of the process being considered, including support
       staff, administrative staff, and clinical staff;
     Invite representatives of those staff groups who are part of the patient process to map the
       process including relevant staff working in the referral Trust/department;
     Involve representatives of patients and carers who use the service;
     Support can be provided from your local Cancer Services Collaborative or Trust
       Modernisation team. Alternatively, contact the National Cancer Services Collaborative team
       for advice and further contact details (see page 3).

   Resources:
     Time allowed depends on the scope of the process to be mapped and the method used;
     Post it notes
     Flip chart
     Flip chart pens

   Methods:
           Either one or two ½ days, no more than 2 weeks apart with same participants (two
             facilitators (minimum) -one to map process and one to note comments, issues, etc).
             All staff groups represented.
           Each individual (or one person) maps their bit of the process and brings to a review
             meeting to establish true and entire process. All staff groups represented.

 Mapping the patient process
Record on post-it notes who does what to the patient
            1        Surgeon/physician tells patient they are to be referred to an
            2        Patient goes home to wait
            3        Appointment letter delivered by post to patient
            4        Patient arrives at hospital
            5        Clinic clerk receives patient and checks details
            6        Oncologist examines patient
            7        Etc
            12       Patient attends for simulation
            13       Etc

       There are bound to be variations so record what happens „80% of the time‟
       Concentrate on what happens to the patient. Don‟t get side tracked by what happens to a
        referral form or request card – these are other processes, which need to be mapped, just
        don‟t get bogged down in detail at this point.

 Analysing the patient process:
Having mapped the patient process, analyse by considering the following:

       How many steps in the process?
       How many times is the patient passed from one person to another (handoff)?
       What is the approximate time of each step?
       What is the approximate time between each step?
       What is the approximate time between first and last step?

       Where does the patient have a wait or have to queue?
       Where are there waiting lists in the system?
       How many steps add no value to the patient? (Ask the patients)
       Where are the problems for patients – what do patients complain about?
       Where are the problems for staff?

   At the stages when there are the longest delays:
     Ask „why?‟ 5 times to get to the real reason for the delay
     Map that part of the process in more detail
     Watch and shadow patients in this part of the process
     Map the relevant parallel process, which may have caused the delay. Parallel processes
              The route the referral letter takes from when the patient is told to when the patient
                 receives the appointment in the post
              The planning process when the patient is not in attendance ie the production of
                 masks, shielding blocks, computer plans
              How space is allocated on the treatment unit

   At the end of the process mapping event:
     Agree next steps
     Identify specific areas for further study
     Collect data where necessary
     Allocate specific actions
     Organise sessions where ideas for improvement can be generated and tests of those ideas
     There may be some obvious actions that everyone agrees with and improvements could be
        made straight away. Just do it!

   Tips:
     Keep the group focused on the objective – current patient process and problems
     Process maps can get very long – use the back of a cheap roll of wallpaper
     Once a group has mapped the patient process, check it out with others who were not able to
        attend the event and with patients
     Photograph the main steps and make a large transportable photo board to take around with
        you to demonstrate the problems
     Back up the map with actual data

     Map the information/support you give to patients:
     Who gives it and at what stage?
     Are there any duplications or contradictions?
     Are there any gaps?
     Find out what patients want and need

    While a group is mapping the process there will be lots of comments, thoughts and ideas. Don‟t
    loose them. Note them on a separate flip chart but move on with the job in hand – mapping and
    analysing the patient process.

Opportunities for streamlining the process
 Can you run processes in parallel rather than sequence?
 Can you reduce hand-offs between staff groups?
 Can you remove unnecessary steps in the process?
 Can you re-order the process to reduce repetitive steps (like re-scheduling)?

Challenge Three: Work to improve the patient/carer experience

Working as part of a CSC project offers an opportunity to explore the patient experience in a
meaningful and constructive way. Rather than focusing specifically upon issues to do with patient
satisfaction, teams are now being encouraged to explore all domains of the patient experience and to
actively involve patients and carers, as key agents, in setting the agenda for change across cancer
services. Clearly, patients‟ views pertaining specifically to radiotherapy services will comprise an
important component of this work.

The following section contains an outline of the CSC approach that has been developed to take this
work forward over the coming months. Whilst this approach has been formed with all cancer patients
in mind, it can very readily be applied to improving the experience of those patients who have
received, or are receiving, radiotherapy treatment.

The approach

There are 3 key parts to this work:
i      generating the ideas for improving the patient experience
ii     implementing the changes
iii    measuring the changes

Generating the ideas for improving the patient experience

The main focus of work to improve the patient/carer experience will involve networks and project
teams working in partnership with patients and carers to set the agenda for change across the CSC
programme and cancer services.

It is proposed that this work is taken forward by engaging patients and carers in a process of:

a. identifying core patient issues to be addressed at a local level to improve the patient experience

b. generating or identifying possible solutions/change options that could be implemented at a local
   level to address the core patient issues

There are a number of ways in which this can be achieved (in order of preference/value):
Network or trust-based discussion groups.
One-to-one interviews (patient journey stories)
Suggestion boxes/feedback systems
Patient questionnaires (only as good as the questions asked)

These forums should provide a mechanism for patients, and their representatives (who can reflect the
wider views of the cancer community), to begin to work in partnership with professionals, identifying
issues and generating possible solutions for change to be taken forward.

Where possible, existing patient focus groups (Network, Trust, Department or Locality based) should
be used / incorporated. Use should also be made of any previous patient surveys, including the locally
derived data from the National Patients Survey.

Resource pack

To assist with this work, a resource pack has been produced. This comprises two booklets.

Booklet one contains a series of pre-identified issues, put forward within the broader context of cancer
care and treatment, that patients may wish to be addressed in order to improve their experience of
having cancer. The issues have been organised under the following sub-headings:

   Access to care: waiting times
   Information, support, communication and understanding
   Involvement, dignity and respect and attitude of health professionals
   Co-ordination, continuity and discharge
   Pain
   Hospital environment/location of services

Booklet two contains a list of „evidence-based‟ solutions/change ideas that could be
implemented locally to address each of the issues contained within booklet one.

The issues and possible solutions included within these booklets have emerged from a literature
review conducted by the Patient Experience Project Team. To obtain copies of these booklets,
please contact your network team, or the CSC national patient experience team.

It is anticipated that these two booklets could be utilised at a local (network or trust) level to facilitate
or develop the process of involving patients, in partnership with professionals, in setting the agenda
for service change. This work could be taken forward in a variety of different ways – one example is
set out in the box below.

Example one:

A Network-based (generic) discussion group is set up , or the CSC patient issues and proposed
solutions booklets from the agenda of an existing meeting or meetings.
The participants are sent a copy of the two booklets in advance of the meeting and are requested to
identify three core issues to be addressed at the local level (from booklet one). The participants are
also asked to review the possible solutions for change (contained within booklet two) that could be
piloted to address the core issues already identified.

During the meeting the participants will be encouraged to identify additional local issues and possible
solutions that are not included within the booklets.

After the session an action plan will be formulated, containing the priorities (as agreed by the
discussion-group participants) to be taken forward, with key timescales against each.

In addition to these two booklets, other locally produced resources could also assist with this work.
For example, it is likely that work to map the patient pathway at trust or project level will have flagged
up locally relevant gaps and priorities for changes to the way in which services are organised and
delivered. Given that patients and carers may wish to base their views and opinions upon current
evidence in terms of service delivery, the findings of this work could also be presented to patients.

Mapping the information and support flow

Alongside this, teams are also encouraged to undertake a mapping exercise to identify the
information and support offered to patients/carers at key points in the care pathway. This work would
be extremely valuable, given that the provision of information (written and verbal) and support across
the care pathway are likely to be priority issues identified by patients. It is recommended that the
findings of this work also be presented to patients and carers in order to elicit their views about the
information and support that is currently offered.

Tumour-specific templates (based upon the ideal patient journey) have been developed to assist
teams in taking forward work to map the provision of information and support across the care
pathway. Copies are enclosed within the CSC Patient and Carer Experience Toolkit.

Implementing the changes
Once the relevant patient group(s) and project team have identified which change(s) they wish to
implement to improve their service, this should be included in the normal team project action plan and
reporting, ie:
 Initial testing work recorded and shared via PDSA (plan, do, study or act stage) reporting in the
    monthly reports - to enable teams to share and learn from each other
 Once the change is implemented, an implemented change/good practice form should be
    submitted with the next monthly report, complete with any supporting protocols, documentation,
    information leaflets. Details of the original situation, the change implemented and the resulting
    impact should be assessed and quantified, where possible.
 Please highlight any implemented changes that have directly evolved from patient involvement, to
    allow us to pull up and share these more easily.

Evaluating the changes
To ensure that implemented changes produce sustainable improvements for patients, they should be
evaluated at a later date.

Many changes fail to be sustained for a variety of reasons:
 Projects move on and further develop – therefore the change may become obsolete or have
   developed further
 Systems are not put in place to ensure change is sustained once initial project activity abates
 Change is related to, or motivated by, project team and lacks service buy in and/or support.
There is little evidence to support the impact of the change for the service and patients.

The development of initial implemented changes highlights the success of any project in service
improvement. The lack of systems and service support should be tackled by good project
management and hand-over skills.
The issue of lack of evidence to support the impact can be resolved by ensuring all implemented
changes are appropriately evaluated (by patient surveys, waiting times monitoring, etc) to
demonstrate their effect and embed practice with teams.

Challenge Four: Being clear about Demand - Complexity and Templates

Many radiotherapy services have experienced rising workloads. However, most services do not have
systems to accurately capture the routine demand for their service.

To obtain a true picture of demand for your service, it will be necessary to undertake demand data
collection, as described below. As a starting point it is vital to establish an accurate referral map, as
described in challenge 2.

Once the referral map has been agreed to reflect all referral routes to your service, the next stage is
to record all referrals received and their complexity (example in appendix 4). You will need to include
any outlying departments that undertake radiotherapy, and a system for capturing abortive,
emergency, inpatient and same-day clinic referrals for treatment.

It may be helpful to include a member of your Trust, department or network information team. They
may be able to help in establishing a system for collecting data on a longer-term or routine basis.

Expressing demand
To make meaningful demand and capacity comparisons, it is important to express both in the same
quantities. The suggested value is TIME.

Total demand (in time) = number of referrals x time taken to complete process

To identify the time taken to complete the process a series of process templates need to be

Developing a process template
     Identify the start and end-points of the complete process (and the individual steps)

         Patient                          Pre-treatment
         consultation                     preparation

     Agree the key activities undertaken for the whole process (as above) and for each step, eg:
      Pre-treatment -      Any mould room preparation
                           Plan preparation and checking
                           Dosimetry and checking
                           Any treatment verification or simulated set-ups
                           Patient information

The suggested HRG process templates are contained in Appendix 4a

     Follow a sample of patients through each step, recording the time taken to complete the task.
     Identify the most common / 80% time taken to complete each step of each process
     Try to keep the number of process templates to a minimum by grouping similar processes
      together, as the HRG definitions defined process templates.
     Remember to include all steps and patient treatments (eg 25 fractions @ 15 minutes per
      treatment = 375 minutes of treatment for that patient)
Calculating demand
Using the expressing demand equation, calculate the total demand for your service from the data you
have collected (referrals and process template times)

Total demand = cumulative total of demand time for each process

Eg.       Simple template        = 10 referrals x 30 minutes” = 300 minutes
          Simple + simulation template   = 20 referrals x 80 minutes* = 1,600 minutes etc.

“30 minutes =   10 minutes set-up
                10 minutes patient information
                5 minutes calculation and checking
                Single treatment @ 5 minutes

*80 minutes =   10 minutes simulation
                10 minutes calculation and checking
                10 minutes patient information
                5 treatments @ 10 minutes each

Total demand for this service = 1,900 minutes

Total demand, however is not a useful currency as it does not identify what different types of capacity
we need to run a service. By using the demand collection templates (appendix 4) and accurately
timing the HRG templates (appendix 4a), we can use the data to tell us what different types of
capacity we need.

From the examples above:
1,900 minutes of total demand requires 100 minutes patient set –up
                                              200 minutes of simulation
                                              300 minutes of patient information
                                              250 minutes of calculation and checking
                                              1,050 minutes of treatment

The electronic spreadsheet and reporting template will automatically calculate the demand per
section, on completion of the demand and template timing information. This data can also be used to
compare performance against Cancer Plan and JCCO /Peer Review waiting times standards.

Longer term monitoring
Knowing the existing demand on services allows us to respond in the acute situation.
However, monitoring demand and complexity over time can give us far more information than what
the current demand and complexity of our service is.

It can also show us:
 changes in the complexity of the workload over time
 seasonal and annual trends in demand
 rising and falling areas of work
Having accurate data on the complexity of the workload (via the timed HRG templates) we can begin
to undertake more realistic service planning activities.

For example:
1. With current departmental practice, breast patients fall within the complex HRG template
    (simulation, computer plan and verify). The department wishes to change the protocol to include
    CT – the complex + imaging HRG template (simulation, CT scan, computer plan and verify).
    Using current demand data and the timings for the CT component of the complex + imaging HRG
    template, a reasonable prediction can be made of the “extra” CT capacity required.

2. The department is considering reducing fractionation schedules for palliative lung cancer patients
   from 10 fractions to 4. Using the relevant template, the reduction in treatment time could be
   predicted and treatment capacity released identified (which could give enough capacity for the
   department to take part in extended fractionation trails – quantified from the relevant template)

Analysis of the demand

   Do you have any unnecessary demand?
   Can you manage the demand?
   Can your service respond to fluctuations in demand?
   Can the fluctuations in demand be reduced?
   How does the demand for your service compare to your available capacity?
   How does demand compare to similar services?
   Do you have referral and treatment protocols?
   Do your patients flow through a streamlined system?
   Do you have a DNA and cancellation policy?
   Can you identify processes that can be done away from constraint areas, eg key equipment/staff,

Challenge Five: Capacity, Activity and Backlog – making useful comparisons

True demand and capacity studies require ongoing, routine measurement of demand, capacity,
activity and backlog.
However, most capacity and demand studies in healthcare to date have focussed on single step
patient processes, such as endoscopy, radiology or outpatient visits.

Radiotherapy is different. The processes that patients go through generally involve many visits and
steps. The first radiotherapy toolkit attempted to get teams to undertake a traditional capacity and
demand study with the following results:

   Collecting the data was extremely time-consuming
   Establishing capacity and activity was difficult in areas where staff are not directly linked to
    equipment, eg mould room, planning, dosimetry, checking and patient information activities
   Broad comparisons of service demand, capacity, activity and backlog were meaningless as over-
    capacity in one area could mask a serious capacity shortage in another area
   Establishing demand, capacity, activity and backlog measures for each sub-section was felt to be
    a mammoth task – teams began to concentrate on what they felt were key areas (not necessarily
    the true constraint)

We needed a different approach to enable teams to collect a manageable and meaningful level of
data and concentrate on using this to inform improving the service for patients. The key to this for
radiotherapy services is using accurate demand and complexity data to establish:

   you have the required capacity to meet demand (and cope with the demand variation) at all steps
   activity levels needed to meet the demand
   the time/capacity required to work off any backlog

If you are routinely monitoring the complexity and demand for your service, capacity, activity and
backlog comparisons need only be undertaken to establish balance, quantify a situation or assess the
impact of any service change.


Capacity is the amount of resource available to provide the service, ie. a composite of equipment,
space, staff and skills available for that period of time. If one of the elements required to provide the
service is missing, you do not have the capacity. Discrepancies arise because there is a key
difference between planned and actual capacity.

The simulator is staffed between the hours of 8.30am and 5pm – planned capacity= 8.5hrs
Medical staff sessions 9 –12.30 and 2-5pm                      - actual capacity = 6.5 hrs

Demand and complexity data can give us much more accurate information about what types of
capacity we need at the various points in our system. To establish whether your systems have the
required capacity to meet the demand and its complexity, you will need to undertake a comparison.
From our demand calculations (challenge four)

Simple template 30 minutes =     10 minutes set-up
                                        10 minutes patient information
                                        5 minutes calculation and checking
                                        Single treatment @ 5 minutes

Simple + simulation template             80 minutes =     10 minutes simulation
                                                          10 minutes calculation and checking
                                                          10 minutes patient information
                                                          5 treatments @ 10 minutes each

Weekly demand per template
HRG template      Monday         Tuesday        Wednesday         Thursday        Friday
Simple            1              0              2                 4               5
Simple+sim        5              3              5                 2               0

Weekly demand in time per section
Section            Monday       Tuesday         Wednesday         Thursday        Friday
Patient set-up     10 min       0 min           20 min            40 min          50 min
Simulation         50 min       30 min          50 min            20 min          0 min
Patient            60 min       30 min          70 min            60 min          50 min
Calculation +      55 min       30 min          60 min            40 min          25 min
Treatment          255 min      150 min         260 min           120 min         25 min

The electronic spreadsheet and reporting template will automatically calculate the demand required
per section, on completion of the demand and template timing information. This data can then be
used to compare against the capacity available.

One of the difficulties facing radiotherapy services is variation in demand (and sometimes, capacity
and activity) and the impact this has.

From the table above, it can be seen that the capacity needed at each step varies on a daily basis. To
enable us to truly match capacity and demand on a daily basis, we would need an extremely flexible
service, or large amounts of “free” capacity.
The temptation is to take an average of the weekly, monthly or annual demand and set our capacity at
that level.

For example (from the table above):
Average weekly calculation + checking demand = 55+30+60+40+25 = 42 minutes

This means that on Tuesday, Thursday and Friday we would have the required capacity to meet the
demand on that day (with some waste). We would be short of capacity on Monday and Wednesday,
which would lead to a build-up of work.

Setting the capacity at the right level
The way to set capacity to minimise waste and ensure we reduce the opportunity of building a waiting
list is to set the capacity at 80% of the variation in demand.

Example (using the demand data as above)

Demand varies from 60 minutes (top value) to 25 minutes (lowest value), therefore the variation in
demand is                                    60 – 25 = 35 minutes
80% of this variation is                     35 x 80/100 = 28 minutes
Setting the capacity at 80% of the demand            28 +25 (lowest value) = 53 minutes

This means that there would be enough capacity to meet the demand on the same days as above,
but with a much narrower gap between the lack of capacity and demand on Monday and Wednesday,
reducing the risk of work building up.

Opportunities for redesign
The following questions can help in highlighting things that affect/reduce available capacity:

       When is maintenance done?
       How flexible are staff?
       Can staff be moved, multi-skilled or streamlined?
       What reduces your planned capacity?
       Is capacity planned/scheduled when everyone is available?
       Are you booking your capacity too far in advance?
       Can the system flex to match variations in demand?

Remember to look at opportunities for looking at reducing any inappropriate demand and also any
ways of reducing it‟s daily variation.

Sometimes, a room/area utilisation audit can give vital clues about what is affecting capacity – where
and why it is unused, constraints reducing available capacity, etc.


If there is a wait time for your service, in order to quantify how long this would take to work off, or
monitor it during a period of demand management / increased capacity, the backlog burden for the
various sections would need to be quantified from the demand plus template timings.
The electronic reporting spreadsheets will automatically calculate the demand in time for each
section. You will have to identify how much of that demand is waiting.

           Validate the waiting list, separate out those patients who are not scheduled to start until
            after completing adjuvant chemotherapy or hormone therapy and any that no longer
            require treatment
           Identify the number of referrals waiting
           Time it takes to do the request x the number waiting = time necessary to clear the back
            log (as in the demand time per section example previously)

   Analysing the data:
         Are the number on the waiting list stable, increase or decreasing?
         Are waiting times stable increasing or decreasing?
Test out innovative ways of eliminating backlog. Any initiative to reduce backlog/waiting list will not
provide a long-term solution if the system that produced the delay is not changed.

These methods could also be used to identify any variations in departmental activity you wished to
Although activity measures are used in commissioning services year on year, it is important to be
aware that activity data gives no real indication of actual demand for any service. Activity measures
only tell us the volume of work done in the identified time period.

However, if you are redesigning processes and you feel one outcome is likely to be improved
efficiency then trend data on activity over time may be useful.

Try to record activity in units which are comparable to demand and capacity data, i.e. time.

Challenge Six: Access and patient choice

The following extract is taken from the Modernisation Agency National Booking Programme

The NHS requires a standard definition of what constitutes a booking for appointments and
admissions to health and social care services. The National Booking Programme has progressed
greatly both in terms of spread throughout England and in increased knowledge and skills about
booking since the first pilots in 1998. The definition has been revised twice since 1998 and required
further revision based on feedback and evidence of improvements from teams within health and
social care. This revised definition will continue to support NHS Organisations and teams to provide
improved access to health care for patients and enable choice through booking.

The NHS Plan gave a commitment that, by December 2005, along with reduced access times all
patients and their GPs will be able to book outpatient appointments and inpatient elective admissions
at a date, time and place that is convenient to the patient.

Until September 2002 a patient could only be considered to be booked if the health care provider was
able to offer booked appointments and/or admissions during or within one working day of a mutual
agreement of the decision to refer. This mutual decision was made by the patient and health care

The concept of partial booking was introduced widely in the „Step by Step Guide to Improving
Outpatient Services‟ (July 2000). The National Booking Programme has recommended
implementation of partial booking for those specialities with longer waiting times for example six
months for in- patient or day surgery care. It, when implemented using redesign, has emerged as a
very effective method of providing certainty and choice for patients and in addition has delivered
organisation benefits such as reduction in DNA and patient cancellation of appointments which are
also seen when adopting full booking. Until now partial booking has not been included as a „booking‟.

A booking is the result of a process where the patient and health care provider/practitioner agree a
convenient and clinically appropriate date and time for their appointment, treatment or intervention..

Patient choice
For an appointment, treatment or intervention to be considered booked the patient must be able to,
agree/choose a date within a range of dates available at the hospital or other service provider. When
a patient needs to be seen urgently (within 2 weeks if cancer is suspected) it is expected that the
range of dates will be smaller than those offered for a routine service. However, even in these
circumstances, it needs to be clear to the patient that they can choose to wait longer if that is what
they want.

Time scale
There are two elements to a booking and these are determined by time. Health care providers will
have an objective to redesign services so they are able to offer booked appointments and/or
admissions during or within one working day of the mutual agreement. Patients can choose to confirm
or book their appointment outside of the agreed time-scales, if this is the case the appointment can be
classed as fully booked and waiting time can be calculated from the time the patient chooses to
confirm or book their appointment or admission. This type of booking is most effective where the
waiting times for an appointment or admission are six months or less.

Where waiting times are six months or above, it is more appropriate to redesign services to support
partial booking. This is the scenario where a patient is advised of the total indicative waiting time for
access to a service and arrangements are agreed for contact to be at a reasonable time before that
date. During this contact the patient is able to choose and confirm their appointment or admission.
Both the patient choice and time scale criteria will need to be met for an appointment or admission to
be classed as booked.

The definition of a fully booked appointment or admission is therefore:

        The patient is given the choice of when to attend. For full booking the patient is given
               the opportunity to agree a date at the time of, or within one working day of the
               referral or decision to admit. The patient may choose to agree the date when
               initially offered or defer the decision until later.

The definition of a partially booked appointment or admission is therefore:

 The patient is given the choice of when to attend. For partial booking the patient is advised
   of the total waiting time during the consultation between themselves and the health care
                                   provider/practitioner. The patient is able to
choose and confirm an appointment or admission approximately four to six weeks in advance
                                     of their appointment or admission date.

As waiting times are reduced health care providers will examine the potential to move
from partial booking to full booking.

Multiple Booking
Many organisations are now able to offer patients increased certainty and choice by offering booked
dates for care or treatment across the whole patient pathway. Booking can be counted at each point
in the pathway where a clinical decision is made about subsequent treatment for example:

   GP referral and booking into a clinic
   decision to investigate further and booking into diagnostics for example radiology.
   decision to operate and booking onto a theatre list
   decision to refer and booking into a Tertiary Centre
   decision to discharge from one organisation and booking into follow up care
   decision to commence a course of treatment/investigation and booking for each attendance to
    that treatment or investigation.

Change for Improvement.
Booking appointments or admissions represents a significant change within the NHS. It is important to
recognise that booking is part of a change process which aims to significantly improve the care and
services we provide to patients.
The process or pathway within which booking is part should be one that is designed around the
patient and based on good practice. To ensure this, each process or pathway that is to incorporate
booking should be examined. Redesign of the process should be undertaken if when examined it is
found not to be designed around the patient or based on good practice. For example, patients are
often able to agree a date and book for a follow up appointment. Emerging evidence is demonstrating
that not all follow up appointments are being carried out in the most appropriate place or by the most
appropriate person. Some follow up appointments are not necessary. This process is not centred
around the patient nor can it be considered good practice.
Booking must not be counted if it is within a process that has not been examined.

Data Recording
The NHS, through the National Booking Programme has been recording booking data since 1998 and
this will be augmented by National data collection, in due course. This review and agreement of
definitions will both provide clear advice on what a booked admission or appointment represents and
ensure a national standard for those booked admissions and appointments.

Lynne Maher
National Booking Programme, December 2002

Challenge Seven: Redesign the process and look at new ways of working

Focus on the patient. Avoid processes, which are arranged around the needs of staff departments or
organisations, at the expense of patient care.
Think about: -

   What is the most appropriate care?
   Who is the most appropriate person to give the care?
   When is the most appropriate time to give this care?
   Where should this care ideally take place?

Re-designing to match demand and capacity

   Can you effectively and appropriately reduce or manage demand?
   Resolve capacity problems at the appropriate point in the system
   Deal with constraints
   Reduce all unnecessary waits and delays (delays that are not due to a lack of capacity)
   Reduce/eliminate batching. Do the work when it arrives rather than waiting.
   Estimate the number of queues (groups of patients waiting) and the amount of time and effort
    required managing those queues.
   Reduce the number of hand offs
   Reduce the number of follow up appointments
   Reduce the number of visits patient make to the hospital and/or the amount of time they spend
    waiting around at the hospital on each visit
   Eliminate any backlogs waiting lists
   Match capacity and demand

Identify new ways of working

In generating options for change, thinking about new ways of working is key. You may want to link
into the national “EPD strategy Changing Workforce Programme” and their Toolkit to assist in this

The term new ways of working covers four types of change:

       Moving tasks up or down a traditional uni-disciplinary ladder (eg radiographer-led planning,
        the use of helpers/assistants, etc)
       Expanding the breadth of a job (eg the healthcare support worker taking on both auxiliary and
        patient carer roles)
       Increasing the depth of a job (eg radiographer on-treatment review, limited prescribing
       New jobs (eg combining tasks in a different way. Co-ordinator roles have emerged to
        manage complex referral processes and decrease hand-offs in some services)

There are many examples of innovative practice across the country that have achieved improvements
in the care that patients experience. In addition to the types of changes identified above, the following
may be useful to consider:

       Is it possible to distinguish between complex and simple work?
       Are the same clinicians doing both?
       What is the impact of specialist versus mixed lists?
       Is it possible to design two processes with different practitioners and administrative processes
        – one for simple and one for complex procedures?
       Are there opportunities to introduce new roles which offer greater flexibility in covering lists,
        moving between sites, working across boundaries, releasing time for use elsewhere (eg

    picking up consultant simple follow-up work freeing the consultant to do more planning or see
    new patients)?
   Are there staff who want to develop specialist expertise?
   Are there opportunities for developing new administrative roles, focused on pulling the patient
    through the process of care, co-ordinating each stage of that patient‟s journey?
   What opportunities exist for support worker roles?
   What training and education will assist in developing a new range of competencies that
    address constraints identified?
   What help can the local workforce development confederation offer?

Challenge Eight: Collecting the data and monitoring progress

Recognising the challenges of collecting radiotherapy data, we have slimmed down
the amount of data required to the minimum level, concentrating on demand and the
complexity of patient pathway.

The data collection tool is available as an Excel spreadsheet, with some basic data analysis built in. If
you require any help at any point with understanding, or interpreting the data you have collected,
please do not hesitate to contact a member of the national team.

The thrust of the data collection is to inform service redesign and monitor the impact of any changes
you make. It is just one tool we use in our aim of improving radiotherapy services.

However, it has become apparent that routine monitoring of demand and complexity data allows
much more timely detection of the shifts that occur in referral patterns and changes to treatment
regimes or delivery that would not become apparent through activity or patient number monitoring.
Timely detection allows shifting practices to become more easily incorporated into our routine service
delivery and longer term planning at an earlier stage. This, hopefully will help to avoid the current
situation of catch-up (with equipment) and coping (by delivering what some consider sub-optimal
treatment fractionations to cop with limited capacity with growing complexity and demand).

Efforts need to be made to make the data collection as easy as possible. Where teams have access
to patient management/scheduling systems, some data can be pulled (using reporting tools) for these

Work is ongoing nationally with the systems manufacturers to alert them to teams data needs.
However, each system varies and before any data collection is undertaken manually we would advise
speaking to your IT department and/or system administrator to enlist their help where possible - the
data may already be available or easily attained.

Secondly, we are aware of the Cancer Plan target for referral to treatment of 62 days (for those
patients receiving their first treatment). As this target will apply to only a small proportion of those
patients receiving radiotherapy, the collection of this data, and marrying up with the referral date
/information could become elaborate and time consuming. That is why we have tried to make our
dataset/datasheets meaningful to the service by incorporating data on all patients to give a complete

We strongly advise that you collect only the data items in our spreadsheets that apply to your service.
Most Cancer Networks/Trusts will be looking at data matching for Cancer Dataset submission across
a series of providers. Once again we would advise speaking to your IT/Trust and/or Network
Information departments for advise on how they are managing locally.
An excellent network wide guide is available form the Yorkshire Cancer Network (contact the national
team for details)

The radiotherapy project does not have any targets, other than to improve the service delivered to
patients. However, in order to benchmark your service, and show the impact of any improvements
made, the data collection / analysis will automatically compare to the existing CSC, Cancer Plan and
JCCO targets:

RCR                                       Minimum                           Good practice
        emergencies/urgent                within 24 hours
        Palliative                        within 14 days                    within 48 hours
        Radical                           within 28 days                    within 14 days
CSC             initial referral – 1 treatment                     62 days (by April 2003)
Cancer Plan     diagnosis – 1 treatment                            62 days (by 2005)
                Urgent GP referral – 1 treatment                   62 days (by 2005)

Other Useful Sources and Documents

Cancer Services Collaborative (2001) Redesign: a tool kit. Service Improvement Guide. National
Patient Access Team, Modernisation Agency
Cancer Services Collaborative (2001) Patient Information: Service Improvement Guide. National
Patient Access Team, Modernisation Agency
Cancer Services Collaborative (2001) Radiotherapy: Service Improvement Guide. National Patient
Access Team, Modernisation Agency
Cancer Services Collaborative Patient carer toolkit
Cancer Services Collaborative handbook
Modernisation Agency - Twenty-seven principles for redesign
National Booked Admissions Programme (2001) Ready, Steady, Book: A Guide to Implementing
Booked Admissions and Appointments for Patients. Modernisation Agency
National Patient Access Team (2000) Variation in NHS Outpatient Performance. A Step-by-step
Guide to Improving Outpatient Services. Department of Health
Peer Review Cancer Assessment Standards: Cancer Action Team
NHS cancer plan
A survey of radiotherapy services in England 1999 DOH

Radiotherapy HRGs Definition Manual, version 3.1 (December 2001); NHS Information Authority

NHSIA / DSCN – Cancer dataset Modernisation Agency web-site - find out about other redesign
programmes / projects and to access further training. : DOH web-site


Appendix 1              Strategic direction/support

Appendix 2              Radiotherapy Referrals: Understanding Patient Access

Appendix 3              Patient view tool

Appendix 4              Radiotherapy Demand Data Collection spreadsheet

Appendix 5              Radiotherapy template timings spreadsheet

Appendix 6              Draft radiotherapy ideal journey

Appendix 7              Radiotherapy report form

Appendix 8              Good practice proforma

Detachable appendices

Appendix 9              CANCER WAITING TARGETS – A GUIDE

Appendix 10             DSC Notice: 22/2002
                        National Cancer Waiting Times Monitoring

Appendix One:
Strategic Direction

Ownership and Links

It is essential that the redesign process as ownership within the Trust and is not see as a standalone
project, this requires teams to identify key stake holders within an organisation and ensure that there
is close integration with other areas.

                                                                Signed up to process and
Post Holder                     Post Holder name
                                                                implementation of change

Chief Executive

Lead Clinical Oncologist

Lead Physicist

Service manager

Radiotherapy unit

Nominated CSC Project

Booked Admission

Network Management

Appendix 2 – referral map

                            Surgeon /               Surgeon /              Surgeon /
                            Physician               Physician              Physician

                       Speciality                    Speciality                Speciality
                        3 MDT                         1 MDT                     2 MDT

                                               Referral to cancer centre

                                                Patient registration

                                        1 patient oncology consultation

                                               Radiotherapy planning

                                              Pre-treatment preparation

                                                Patient treatment

                                                 Patient discharge

                                                  Patient treatment


                                                Patient discharged

Demand collection sheet                             <500K Simp                                             Multiple        Emerge Radic Palli Yes                No
                                                        v    le                                            planning        ncy    al    ative
If we want to manage the process better we need to map the demand and identify the fluctuations - We can then begin to find out what causes the fluctuations and whether we can influence them.
Where possible, all data items are compatible with NHSIA Cancer and CSC data sets.

        Indicates data items collected for new patients by CSC/NHSIA datasets. Please liase with your cancer network, CSC and IT teams for this
        Indicates items mandatory for Cancer data-set (see appendix of radiotherapy toolkit)
*       Indicates mandatory items for this data-set - to enable monitoring of progress towards CSC, Cancer plan and JCCO/Peer Review targets.
        Indicates data item unique to this dataset. This item is to encompass patient delays, eg for healing, prior programmed treatment (chemo or hormone therapy), etc.

The grey shaded boxes are optional data items to help with any demand sub-categorisation/ bottleneck you may wish to collect as a department.
Extra rows can be added to suit your needs. Click on the number column to the left of the table, go to "insert" and select rows. You can also add extra columns, to suit local need in a similar manner.
<Month>                                                                                                                                                                                               Days
 Date GP/1st Diagn NHS    Date of Source patient Date Consult Decisi Ready Date 1st                          Ready to      Start date *Treat *num *emerge *HRG Area Treat Comm Ready 1st Diagno
referra referra osis Numb decisi    of    RT ID of 1st   ant  on to    to   RT OP                               start      (telethera ment    ber     ncy,    templ treate ment   ents   to    Referr sis >
   l     l date (ICD er    on to oncolo number Oncol           treat start   appt                            treatment      py/brach Booke     of   radical,   ate     d   unit /      Start > al > Treatm
receiv          code)      refer    gy            ogy          date proce   (non-                               date        ytherapy    d    fracti palliativ              modali       Start Treatm ent
  ed                       to an referra           OP                  ss  consulta                          (planning     treatment          ons      e                    ty                  ent
                          approp     l            appt                date    nt)                            complete)      course)
                           riate                 (Cons
                          cancer                 ultant)
                          special                   .
Radiotherapy process templates                          (HRGs)
At each step, insert the time taken for the majority (80%) of patients to have their process completed
eg. treating both fields of an Anterior/posterior patient takes 10 minutes for most patients (from entering to leaving the treatment room).
* Some patients may need to be allocated more than one template, eg planned 2 field breast (complex), plus boost (simple)
*Booking (choice of appointment negotiated with patient within 24 hours of decision to treat/proceed) of each step could be annotated for each template as achieved
     < 500Kv                    Simple               Simple +sim                    Complex               Complex+Imaging             Tech support         Multiple planning
            1                          2                         3                           4                           5                       6                      7
              Time                       time                      time                         time                        Time                   time                      time
              Taken                      taken                     taken                        taken                        taken                 taken                     taken
Oncology OP appt            Oncology OP appt         Oncology OP appt         Oncology OP appt            Oncology OP appt            Oncology OP appt     Oncology OP appt

inform patient             inform patient           inform patient           inform patient              inform patient       inform patient            inform patient

manual calc                manual calc              simulation               simulation                  simulation           simulation                simulation

check                      check                    manual calc              Computer plan               CT scan              impression                impression

data entry                 data entry               check                    check                       Simulation           fit                       fit

inform patient             inform patient           data entry               Verify                      Computer plan        localisation              localisation

1st Treat                  1st Treat                inform patient           data entry                  check                CT scan                   CT scan
no. fractions              no. fractions
routine treat              routine treat            1st Treat                inform patient              Verify               computer plan             computer plan
total treat"               total treat"             no. fractions
                                                    routine treat            1st Treat                   data entry           check                     check
Review                     Review                   total treat"             no. fractions
                                                                             routine treat               inform patient       tech support              Verify
                                                    Review                   total treat"
                                                                                                         1st Treat            verify                    data entry
                                                                             Review                      no. fractions
                                                                                                         routine treat        data entry                inform patient
                                                                                                         total treat"
                                                                                                                              inform patient            1st Treat
                                                                                                         Review                                         no. fractions
                                                                                                                              1st Treat                 routine treat
total treat"    Time for routine treatment, multiplied by number of treatments (not including 1st treatment),                 no. fractions             total treat"
                Plus 1st treatment time (may be different due to enhanced checking/patient communication)                     routine treat
                Point at which patient may need replanning                                                                    total treat"              Review
                Point at which patient may repeat pathway as part of replanning                                               Review

c1c85d76-30d8-45b6-9a69-f4bf9600c980.doc                                                                                                                          29 of 34
c1c85d76-30d8-45b6-9a69-f4bf9600c980.doc   30 of 34
                                    Cancer Services Collaborative

Date report submitted

Report Month (activity period)

Project team/Trust/ Network/
                                               Project Manager              Clinical Lead
Contact Details

Population served – Hospital

                                                  Network                   Project Trust
Number of new cancers per annum


Aim Statement:

Roll out aim:

         Definition of Measure        Target     Baseline        Achieved    Comments

c1c85d76-30d8-45b6-9a69-f4bf9600c980.doc                                                    31 of 34
Plan, Do, Study and Act Cycles (PDSA)
                                                                                                                                    Was the need for the intended
                                                                                                                                    outcome /implemented change
                Description of current work                                  Intended Outcome/Implemented Change
                                                                                                                                      identified by Patient/Carer

Implemented Changes

                                                                                                                   Was the change
                                                                                                                                         Planned Evaluation Date
                                                                                                                    identified by
          Description of change               Situation before change                Situation after change                              & Method of Evaluation
                                                                                                                    Patient/Carer        (Patient/Carer changes only)

Other progress this month

Issues and challenges

Key actions for next month including proposed solutions

Team self-assessment score

I would like a conference call on

Subject                                                          By (date)
                                 Pro fforma tto captture iinfformattiion ffor
                                 Pro orma o cap ure n orma on or
                                    Cancer Serviice Collllaborattiive
                                     Cancer Serv ce Co abora ve
                                              case sttudiies
                                               case s ud es

 Name of CSC project, Trust Cancer Network
 Name, email address and phone number of project manager or other appropriate contact at project level

 Date that change was implemented
 Date that case study was last validated

Details of improvement
 What was the problem?

 How was it identified?

 Which change ideas were tested and worked?

 What were the implemented improvements and how do they benefit patients?

 How many patients has this impacted on?

 What is the situation now?

 Is the improvement sustainable?

How are patients involved in identifying the problems or solutions and evaluation?

Shared By:
Description: Radiotherapy Treatment Chart Sample document sample