Page 64 - APPENDIX B: Trials Investigating the Management of Acute Radiation-Induced Skin Reactions Reading Qualitative Research

64
WOUND CARE

reported more than 10 years’ experience clarified: “I’m trying to clarify about my years, in

working in a total oncology environment. I have only been full-time in this position for a year

but for oncology, I have been over 10 years in other acute care facility, so not as a concentrated

amount. As a concentrated amount, it’s only been one year”.

Review of demographic data reported by the participants’ revealed heterogeneity in the

sample description particularly in the major provinces represented and participants’ roles or

positions. While four provinces were not represented and two of the participants from Ontario

did not complete the survey, the demographic information helped to reveal the geographical

distribution and specific details about the participants’ nursing careers in radiation oncology.

Over 50% of the participants had a Nursing degree and more than 10 years of experience in

radiation oncology, presumably reflecting staffing retention in radiation oncology clinical

settings.

Phase II Survey Findings

Report of current practice. The first set of questions following the demographic

section on the survey focused on common skin assessment tools used in daily practice for the

management of dermatitis, frequency of assessments and whether radiating through dressings is

a standard practice.

Skin assessment tool for radiation dermatitis. Table 4.5 illustrates that most (71%) of

the Radiation Oncology Centres in Canada used the NCI Common Toxicity Criteria assessment

tool for radiation dermatitis. In addition, Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) criterion

was also widely used (41%). “Check all that applies” was an option provided and on

examination of responses four respondents picked two of the answer choices. Though similar,

both the tools reflect only the observable physical assessment and do not take into account of the