Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology Advance Access first published online on August 1, 2007
This version published online on August 4, 2007
Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology, doi:10.1093/jjco/hym073
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
© 2007 Foundation for Promotion of Cancer Research
Current Status of the Infrastructure and Characteristics of Radiation Oncology in Korea
Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
For reprints and all correspondence: Seung Jae Huh, Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, 50 Ilwon-Dong, Gangnam-Gu, Seoul, 135-710, Korea. E-mail: sj5201.huh{at}samsung.com
Received February 7, 2007; accepted April 7, 2007
Background: An analysis of radiotherapy infrastructure in Korea was performed in 2006 to collect data on treatment devices, the work force and new patients for future development plans.
Methods: The survey included radiotherapy centers, their major equipment and personnel. The centers were categorized into four levels: level 0 (stand-alone teletherapy units); level 1 (teletherapy, brachytherapy, treatment planning system, and at least the part-time service of a medical physicist); level 2 (level 1 plus individual customized radiotherapy block and full-time medical physicist); and level 3 [level 2 plus intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), intra-operative radiation therapy or stereotactic radiotherapy].
Results: A total of 61 facilities delivered radiation therapy with 104 megavoltage devices, which included 96 linear accelerators, two cobalt 60 units, three Tomotherapy, two CyberKnife units and one proton accelerator. There were 28 789 new radiotherapy patients in 2004. Personnel included 132 radiation oncologists, 50 radiation oncology residents, 64 physicists, 130 nurses and 369 radiation therapy technologists. Thirty-two percent (20 facilities) used a CT-simulator, 66% (40) used a PET or PET-CT scanner, and 35% (22) had the capacity to implement IMRT. Centers were also divided into four levels: 41% were included in level 3, 31% in level 2, 25% in level 1 and 3% in level 0.
Conclusions: There is a shortage of human resources. The distribution of megavoltage units per million inhabitants over the country was inadequate; geographic disparities were noted. Furthermore, the necessity of quality assurance for recent high-technology radiation therapy is increasing.
Key Words: radiotherapy infrastructure of Korea • equipment and facilities • manpower and services