Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “HOSPITAL”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 109 records · Page 6
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2014

SU-E-T-68: Clinical Implementation of Total Skin Electron Beam Therapy: A New- York Presbyterian Hospital Experience

Purpose: Total skin electron beam therapy (TSET) is used in the treatment of rare skin diseases such as mycosis fungoides, the most common type of cutaneous T-cell lymphoma. We report our experience with clinical implementation of TSET. Methods: A modified six-dual-field irradiation technique was chosen to deliver TSET. A Varian Trilogy linear accelerator with a nominal 6 MeV beam using high dose rate total skin electron mode (HDTSe) was employed. The recommendations of AAPM task group report 23 were followed for the commissioning. An acrylic plate (energy degrader) of 3.2 mm depth was mounted on the HDTSe applicator. The nominal source to skin distance was set at 450 cm. The optimum tilt angle of the gantry was determined using NACP-02 ionization chamber embedded in certified therapy grade solid water. Percent depth dose measurements were performed using ionization chamber and radiochromic films embedded in solid water and anthropomorphic phantom. For absolute dose measurements, TG-51 formalism was employed. The dose distribution on the entire skin was measured by irradiating the anthropomorphic phantom, with TLDs attached, mimicking the real treatment. Results: The 3.2 mm acrylic plate mounted on the HDTSe applicator degraded the energy of the electron beam to 4.1 MeV in the treatment plane, located at an SSD of 450 cm. The optimum tilt angle was found to be ±20°. A single-dual field had a longitudinal uniformity, measured at a depth of dose maximum, of ±7% over a length of about 200 cm. For the entire treatment the multiplication factor was found to be 2.86. On the surface of the phantom, the dose varied from 108% to 93% of the prescription dose. Conclusion: We have successfully commissioned TSET meeting the guidelines of the TG report 23, and treated our first patient on February 25, 2014.

07 ISOTOPE AND RADIATION SOURCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

TU-CD-BRD-02: Henry Ford Hospital System Experience, with Focus On Motivating and Reviewing

It has long been standard practice in radiation oncology to report internally when a patient’s treatment has not gone as planned and to report events to regulatory agencies when legally required. Most potential errors are caught early and never affect the patient. Quality assurance steps routinely prevent errors from reaching the patient, and these “near misses” are much more frequent than treatment errors. A growing number of radiation oncology facilities have implemented incident learning systems to report and analyze both errors and near misses. Using the term “incident learning” instead of “event reporting” emphasizes the need to use these experiences to change the practice and make future errors less likely and promote an educational, non-punitive environment. There are challenges in making such a system practical and effective. Speakers from institutions of different sizes and practice environments will share their experiences on how to make such a system work and what benefits their clinics have accrued. Questions that will be addressed include: How to create a system that is easy for front line staff to access How to motivate staff to report How to promote the system as positive and educational and not punitive or demeaning How to organize the team for reviewing and responding to reports How to prioritize which reports to discuss in depth How not to dismiss the rest How to identify underlying causes How to design corrective actions and implement change How to develop useful statistics and analysis tools How to coordinate a departmental system with a larger risk management system How to do this without a dedicated quality manager Some speakers’ experience is with in-house systems and some will share experience with the AAPM/ASTRO national Radiation Oncology Incident Learning System (RO-ILS). Reports intended to be of value nationally need to be comprehensible to outsiders; examples of useful reports will be shown. There will be ample time set aside for audience members to contribute to the discussion. Learning Objectives: Learn how to promote the use of an incident learning system in a clinic. Learn how to convert “event reporting” into “incident learning”. See examples of practice changes that have come out of learning systems. Learn how the RO-ILS system can be used as a primary internal learning system. Learn how to create succinct, meaningful reports useful to outside readers. Gary Ezzell chairs the AAPM committee overseeing RO-ILS and has received an honorarium from ASTRO for working on the committee reviewing RO-ILS reports. Derek Brown is a director of http://TreatSafely.org . Brett Miller has previously received travel expenses and an honorarium from Varian. Phillip Beron has nothing to report.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

Ground-Mounted Solar Array in Hospitality

This case study describes how Marriott franchise TownePlace Suites developed a large solar installation on a previously unused four-acre piece of land adjoining the hotel.

Commercial, hospitality, hotel, ground mounted arr↗
DOE OSTI2021

Using occupant interaction with advanced lighting systems to understand opportunities for energy optimization: Control data from a hospital NICU

For this study, lighting system control data from five patient rooms in a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) over a 25-week monitoring period were analyzed to better understand how the NICU staff and families interacted with an automatic tunable lighting system (variable spectrum and intensity) with manual override options. The data were analyzed to determine the amount of time spent in available lighting modes, estimate energy consumption, and to observe any patterns in how the lighting system was being used by occupants. Further analysis revealed opportunities for optimizing the system for occupant needs and energy savings. The patient room occupants were clearly engaged in using the lighting system throughout the 24-hour day to meet needs and preferences. Giving occupants control over the lighting system did not result in a considerable increase in energy use. Implementing a time-out would minimize the extended periods of time when the lights were left on without need at the highest brightness level, further decreasing energy use. This analysis reveals the potential of lighting control data to contribute to energy savings.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2017

Re-evaluation of Ipsilateral Radiation for T1-T2N0-N2b Tonsil Carcinoma at the Princess Margaret Hospital in the Human Papillomavirus Era, 25 Years Later

Purpose: To report the outcome of ipsilateral radiation therapy (RT) in human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive (HPV+) patients and HPV-negative (HPV−) patients with T1-T2N0-N2b tonsillar cancer treated 25 years after our initial historical cohort. Methods and Materials: Patients with T1-T2N0-N2b tonsillar cancer who received ipsilateral RT or bilateral RT between 1999 and 2014 were reviewed. Overall survival (OS), local control (LC), regional control (RC), and grade 3 to 4 late toxicity (LT) were compared between ipsilateral RT and bilateral RT within HPV+ and HPV− patients, separately. Results: HPV status was ascertained in 379/427 (88%) consecutive patients (ipsilateral RT: 62 HPV+, 34 HPV−; bilateral RT: 240 HPV+ 240, 41 HPV−). The proportion of ipsilateral RT by N category for HPV+ and HPV− patients were as follows: N0: 24/37 (65%) versus 28/48 (74%); N1: 21/49 (43%) versus 4/9 (44%); N2a: 10/39 (26%) versus 1/4 (25%); and N2b: 7/177 (4%) versus 1/24 (4%), respectively. Of the patients receiving ipsilateral RT, 94/96 (98%) were treated with RT alone. The median follow-up time was 5.03 years. The respective 5-year rates of OS, LC, RC, and LT were similar between ipsilateral RT and bilateral RT for the HPV+ patients (OS: 89% vs 87%, P=.55; LC: 97% vs 98%, P=.65; RC: 98% vs 97%, P=.27; LT: 17% vs 12%, P=.83) and HPV− patients (OS: 63% vs 48%, P=.27; LC: 90% vs 80%, P=.19; RC: 94% vs 83%, P=.14; LT: 15% vs 22%, P=.36). Of the 96 patients receiving ipsilateral RT, contralateral neck failure (CNF) occurred in 1/52 HPV+ patients and 1/34 HPV− patients. The 5-year CNF rates were 2% (95% CI: 1-9) (HPV+: 2% [0-14]; HPV−: 3% [0-21], P=.66). Five local failures (2 HPV+; 3 HPV−) and no distant failures were seen. The 5-year rates of LC, RC, and LT were 97% versus 90% (P=.24), 98% versus 94% (P=.25), and 18% versus 15% (P=.75) for the HPV+ and HPV− cohorts, respectively. Osteoradionecrosis occurred in 9 patients: 6/47 (13%) treated with conventional RT and 3/49 (6%) with intensity modulated RT (P=.32). Conclusion: Ipsilateral radiation to selected patients with T1-T2N0-N2b tonsillar cancer results in equally excellent outcomes regardless of tumor HPV status.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗