Newsletter AMERICAN ASSOCIATION
OF
PHYSICISTS
IN
VOLUME 25 NO.3
MEDICINE MAY/JUNE 2000
AAPM President’s Column Summer is Around the Corner
Planning our Future
By Kenneth Hogstrom Houston, TX By the time you get this newsletter it will be getting warmer everywhere, and activities within the AAPM are no exception. I hope that each of you is preparing to attend t h e Wo r l d C o n g r e s s o n Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, which includes our 42nd annual meeting of the AAPM and will take place from July 23-28, 2000 at Navy Pier Convention Center in Chicago. For those planning to attend, we can expect an outstanding meeting of scientific, educational, professional, society, vendor, and social programs. I look forward to sharing in this summer’s experience with you, and I invite each of you to the president’s symposium on Tuesday entitled "Medical Imaging: The Foundation for Diagnosis and Therapy," featuring speakers Ed Jackson, Peter Bandettini, and Marc Kessler. I also hope that many of you are planning to attend the 2000 AAPM summer school, "General Practice of Radiation Oncology in the Next Century," which takes place immediately
following the World Congress, July 29- August 1, on the Northern Illinois University campus in Dekalb, IL. The summer school program directors are two of my former graduate students, Almon Shiu and David Mellenberg, and the local arrangements coordinator is Kevin Corrigan. Some of the best continuing education information you can find is part of our summer schools, and this one will be no exception. Many of my fonder memories of the AAPM come from time spent with colleagues, friends, and family at our summer schools. If you want time to focus on the latest in radiation oncology physics, to be able to meet and personally discuss topics with experts in the field, and to relax with friends and family, be there!
1
One major event each year is the AAPM Long Range Planning meeting that is held each spring in conjunction with an Executive Committee (EXCOM) meeting. The past few years, this entailed the chairs and vice-chairs of the Education, Science, and Professional Councils meeting with EXCOM and discussing their long-range plans. This year’s meeting, which will be held the weekend of April 29-30 at AAPM headquarters, will be different. In addition to the traditional
INSIDE TABLE OF CONTENTS President’s Column………..P.1 Rules Committee on Ethics.....p.4 ACR Standards Perspective....p.5 Headquarters Office Expands!....p.7 Oral Exams Rationale….…p.8 Executive Directors Column..p.10 Announcements…………p.11 Problem Solved & Einstein…p.12 Southeastern Chapter Meeting......p.13 New Members………...…p.14
AAPM NEWSLETTER
council involvement, select committee chairs from all three councils and administrative committees and select individual appointees will attend. The meeting format will be different in that there will be parallel discussion groups addressing specific issues on Saturday, followed by presentations and discussions with the entire group on Sunday. Prior to the meeting, all committees and subcommittees have been requested to submit to me for distribution a list of each committee’s current goals and strategic issues in need of discussion. It will be EXCOM’s goal to produce a long-range planning document that better focuses and integrates our efforts, one month prior to the annual AAPM meeting.
Elected Officials for 2001 I am pleased to report that your Nominating Committee, consisting of Colin Orton, L a r r y R o t h e n b e r g , and myself as chair, recently completed its recommendations for the slate of candidates for elected AAPM positions for 2001. The recommended slate included two candidates for president-elect, one candidate for treasurer, and eight candidates for board member-atlarge. The Board of Directors has been informed of the slate, as are AAPM members, who have the opportunity to nominate additional members for board member-at-large. The secretary will then poll
MAY/JUNE 2000
the membership, and the results of the election will be presented at our annual business meeting. The Nominating Committee believes the slate to contain qualified members who are enthusiastic about serving and will serve our association for the good of medical physics. We were particularly impressed with the enthusiasm and willingness which individuals accepted the opportunity to be on the ballot. I want to thank Colin and Larry for their participation in completing this task in an outstanding manner. I ask that each member participate in the upcoming election, as this is your chance for input into our association.
Volunteer Committee Appointments President-elect Charlie Coffey is beginning to work diligently on selecting new appointments to our 2001 committees and councils. Speaking from experience, this is a tedious job, but very important to the operation and future of the AAPM. Each of you should have received a Call for Volunteers/AAPM 2001 flyer in your April mailing from headquarters. I hope that those willing to serve take time to complete and return the form. Copies of the form, with instructions for electronic submission, can be found on the AAPM web page under ‘new in organization.’ To further your chance for being given the opportunity to serve, I suggest you make personal contact with the chair of the council or committee on
2
which you wish to serve. This can be accomplished by making a phone call and/or attending the committee’s meeting during our summer annual meeting. Remember, recommendations for committee appointments usually are made following communications between the presidentelect and the committee chair. Both want to appoint members that are best qualified, interested, and able to be active. Also, committee chairs usually appoint members to subcommittees and task groups, and one way to become active and establish a reputation in a committee’s area is to volunteer for service on a subcommittee or task group. We look forward to hearing from many of you, as the AAPM’s success is dependent on its volunteers!
ACR and ABR Nominees for appointments As I wrote in last month’s column, our Board of Directors will select three candidates to be recommended as candidates for the chair of the American College of Radiology Commission on Medical Physics (ACR CMP), which is being vacated by Don Tolbert in June. The board found many qualified medical physicists who were agreeable to being candidates for this process. A recent vote of the board resulted in the following three members being selected (alphabetical order): Michael Gillin, Geoffrey Ibbott, and Colin Orton. These members are in the process of being recommended to Dr. Max Cloud, chair of the ACR Board of Chancellors.
AAPM NEWSLETTER
Also, the AAPM has just received notification from Paul Capp, executive director of the American Board of Radiology (ABR), that two of its radiologic physics trustees will be reaching the end of their four-year terms on June 30, 2001. Bill Hendee, who is at the end of his first term, is presently serving as secretary/ treasurer of the ABR, and Dr. Capp has requested that AAPM confirm that it is our wish to renominate Bill Hendee for a second term. Guy Simmons is at the end of his second term, and the ABR has requested that the AAPM provide at least three nominees for his replacement. Responses for both of these will be decided by your Board of Directors, the latter using the process used to provide nominees last year that resulted in Bhudatt Paliwal becoming a radiologic physics trustee for the ABR.
American Institute of Physics The American Institute of Physics (AIP) exists for the purpose of promoting the advancement and diffusion of the knowledge of physics and its application to human welfare. Its mission is to serve the sciences of physics and astronomy by serving its ten member societies, individual scientists, students, and the general public. The AAPM is one of its member societies, and Chris Marshall and Jim Smathers serve as our representatives to the AIP governing board. On March 30-31, I had the opportunity to attend a meeting of the assembly of society officers in College Park, MD, held
in the American Center for Physics, the same building that houses our headquarters. The Thursday sessions covered future demographics of our societies and physics and the media, and the Friday session covered future of society publishing. There were a few key observations that I want to share with you. Physics bachelor’s production has been steadily decreasing since 1990, from about 5,000 to 4,000 presently. This in part explains why we are seeing it more difficult each year to bring these graduates into medical physics graduate programs. Approximately 30% of the graduates enter physics graduate studies, 20% enter other graduate studies, and 40% enter the workforce (10% undecided). The latter computes to approximately 1,600 graduates that are available for other positions in our field such as dosimetry trainees, radiological physics technologists, etc. These data, salary data, and other statistics, which are gathered by the AIP education and employment statistics division, are available in report form or on the AIP web site (www.aip.org). With these small numbers, we must proactively seek out these graduates into our field. As part of public education, I see us developing programs to better educate physics undergraduates, e.g. through information provided regularly to the Society of Physics Students newsletter and through developing tools that medical physicists can use to educate undergraduates via seminars and survey courses. Another valuable service that many of
3
MAY/JUNE 2000
you may not be aware of is that the AIP has an on-line job listings service under the career services/employment and industries part of its web site. This may be useful for those recruiting bachelor physics graduates. Regarding public education, the AIP offers several tools for us. One is that it produces three videos a week that are released to a syndicated network. I believe that we have the opportunity to provide the AIP with leads for multiple topics in medical physics. Also, the AIP offers a ‘Careers in Physics’ video and CD that includes medical physics as one of ten highlighted careers. There were multiple other methods for public education, which we can apply, and which I hope our Public Education Committee will consider. Friday morning was devoted to discussing the future of society publishing. My observation was that the AAPM, compared to most other AIP societies, is less dependent on its journal for its revenue and is further ahead in the world of electronic publication.
AAPM NEWSLETTER
MAY/JUNE 2000
Rules of the AAPM/Committee on Ethics By Jay Freedman Hartford, CT The Rules of the AAPM that establish the Committee on Ethics specifically list three areas of endeavor. These are: 1) Preparing guidelines on the ethical practice of medical physics 2) Investigating complaints involving alleged unethical practices of medical physics by or relating to AAPM members, and 3) Preparing and maintaining procedures for resolving ethical problems. At its last meeting, the committee took final action on revisions to its guidelines and to its procedure for problem resolution. After consultation with the Professional Council, item number three from the Guidelines for Ethical Practice for Medical Physics (found on page 31 of the 2000 AAPM Directory) has been revised to read: “3. Medical Physicists are obliged to uphold the honor and dignity of their profession by exhibiting sound moral character and the highest competence in their work. A medical physicist should not render his signature in a false or misleading way. Unethical conduct of fellow members should be reported to the AAPM Ethics Committee.” The committee felt this revi-
sion was necessary because of the presentation of two cases in which "faked or stolen" data were involved. The Ethics Committee also approved a new Problem Resolution Procedure. Person with ethics concern submits a written statement of the concern to the chairman of the Ethics Committee. The chairman will review the statement for relevance to AAPM Ethics Code. If chairman feels there is an ethics issue, he will contact accused and request his response to the accusation and proceed with step 4. If chairman finds no ethics problem, he will notify the complaintant and the accused of that finding. If the complaintant is not satisfied with the chairman’s finding, then he can request in writing that the chairman proceed with step 4. Chairman will: •Convene a panel of three members of the committee to review the statement and supporting documentation •Panel will make a recommendation to the full ethics committee for a vote on whether an ethics violation has or has not occurred •If a violation has occurred then the committee may recommend revocation of membership some lesser censure •If vote is that no ethics code violation has occurred then the chairman will notify
4
the complaintant and any other directly involved individuals of that finding. While the Ethics Committee membership is appointed by the President, non-committee members are always welcome at our meetings. Please join us in Chicago this summer.
AAPM NEWSLETTER
MAY/JUNE 2000
A Perspective on ACR Standards – Expounded By David Vassy Spartanburg, S.C. Standards Explained Standards are a set of practices, based on objective evidence and broad consensus that, when applied by qualified individuals, lead to more favorable outcomes. This definition reveals several characteristics of standards that we will discuss briefly. Standards must be "standard." Although it seems obvious, this concept fuels many discussions. Recommendations must be agreed upon by a significant number of competent practitioners. This precludes "wish lists" that some would hope would become "standard." While there is room to "raise the bar," such action must be supported by research wherever possible. Being "standard" also means there is only one standard on a particular topic. If there are "standards" from multiple entities, then payors, regulators, and administrators just won't accept the recommendations as "standards" of care, and will be disinclined to fund Strength comes from inside. Sounds metaphysical or related to car engines, but the point is that much of a standard's real value and credibility stems from respect for the process of development and the organization that promulgates it. ACR Standards begin as drafts from individuals or groups both inside and outside the ACR. The appropriate ACR Standards Committee cre-
ates/reviews the draft over a period of a year or so. Then they submit it to a formalized, 9-month process of review and refinement, involving 4 draft cycles and circulation to sometimes hundreds of individuals in practice that culminates in submission to the ACR Council, a 500-person body representing all aspects of radiology. This Council reviews the draft in committee, and debates in open forum. If approved, the draft becomes an ACR Standard. Standards are automatically reviewed in similar process every 4 years, and can be brought back for c ha nge s be fore t he n if required. ACR Standards aren't cook books. Standards are designed to be references for many nonradiology specialists, including administrators and payors. Their proper use mandates using qualified physicists who apply their training and judgment within the framework of the standard. For detailed guidance, the publications of the AAPM and ACMP are excellent sources, and are often benchmark references in the ACR Standards.
Standards Expanded As of the September 1999, ACR Council Meeting, there are now 82 Standards, 31 of which involve physics and 7 of which are exclusively concerned with Medical Physics physics-related standards for radiotherapy; and at least one for each imaging modality, including MRI and Ultrasound.
5
These standards require that qualified physicists develop and monitor performance and quality control programs for these modalities. These "physics" standards can now be referenced in each clinical practice standard. T h i s demonstrates the importance of working with physician colleagues to incorporate quality-driven physics support into clinical practice standards that physicians and third parties value. Having more Standards provides a broader, more concrete basis for awarding ACR Accreditation. Accreditation is now being used by some payors in some locales and in some modalities to award payment contracts. For example, Aetna/US Healthcare will soon require that MRI facilities be accredited before they will reimburse. Free-standing radiotherapy facilities that are ACR-accredited can achieve "deemed-equivalent-status by JCAHO. Thus, adherence to Standards is becoming linked to accreditation, and ultimately payment for services.
Standards Extrapolated The expanding role of standards is reflected in our current works-in-progress, which include standards in HDR Physics, PET Imaging Physics, as well as standards for Radiation Safety and use of Fluoroscopy. There are number of ways to get personally involved in this process. To begin with, go to the ACR web
AAPM NEWSLETTER
site, acr.org under "Products" to read the standards and related materials. Promote their use. (While there, check out the "ACR Guide To Medical Physics Professional Practice/Guide to Radiological Physics Practice".) A most important way to help may be the least obvious: work within AAPM to produce relevant reports in a timely fashion that can be used as the scientific basis for standards. For example, physics support for treatment to prevent vascular re-stenosis needs to be defined now. Offer yourself to your ACR Chapter President to review draft standards when they arrive. Finally, you can contact the ACR and add your name to a list of members willing to serve on committees when vacancies occur. The new and revised standards for 2000 are:
MAY/JUNE 2000
FDG-PET Scintigraphy in Oncology Computed Tomography for Detection of Pulmonary Embolism High-resolution CT (HRCT) of the Lungs in Adults Standard for the Performance of Percutaneous Vertebroplasty ACR Standard for the Performance of Cardiovascular MRI ACR Standard for the Performance of Neurovascular MRA ACR Standard for Radiologist Coverage of Imaging Performed in Hospital Emergency Departments ACR Standard for the Performance of Percutaneous Permanent Inferior Vena Cava (IVC) Filter Placement for the Prevention of Pulmonary Embolism REVISED STANDARDS
NEW STANDARDS
ACR Standard for General (Plain) Radiography
ACR Standard for the Performance of Radiography of the Lumbosacral Spine
ACR Standard for the Performance of Adult Cystography and Urethrography
ACR Standard for the Performance of Radiography of the Thoracic Spine
ACR Standard for the Performance of Stereotactically-Guided Breast Interventional Procedures
Standard for Quality Improvement for Percutaneous Management of the Thrombosed or Dysfunctional Dialysis Access
ACR Standard for the Performance of Ultrasound-Guided Percutaneous Breast Interventional Procedures
Brachytherapy Physics: Remotely Loaded HDR Sources
ACR Standard for the Performance of Gastrointestinal Scintigraphy
Management of Transperineal Permanent Brachytherapy of Prostate Cancer
ACR Standard for the Performance of Liver/Spleen Scintigraphy
6
ACR Standard for the Performance of Radionuclide Cystography ACR Standard for the Performance of Tumor Scintigraphy ACR Standard for the Performance of Therapy with Unsealed Radionuclide Sources ACR Standard for the Performance of High-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy ACR Standard for the Performance of Low-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy ACR Standard for the Performance of Brachytherapy Physics: Manually-Loaded Sources ACR Standard for Performing and Interpreting Diagnostic Ultrasound Examinations ACR Standard for the Performance of Ultrasound Evaluation of the Prostate (and surrounding structures) ACR Standard for Continuing Medical Education (CME) ACR Standard for the Performance of Abdominal, Renal, or Retroperitoneal Ultrasound Examination in Infants, Children, and Adults (addition of vascular ultrasound sections) ACR Standard for Diagnostic Procedures Using Radiopharmaceuticals ACR Standard for Conscious Sedation ACR Standard for the Performance of MRI FIN „
AAPM NEWSLETTER
MAY/JUNE 2000
Headquarters Office to Expand! by Melissa Martin Bellflower, CA Background In 1998 then President Larry Rothenberg appointed a Headquarters Site Visit Committee (HSVC) to study the headquarters operations. One of this committee’s recommendations was to study AAPM’s options before more space was leased at the American Center for Physics (ACP). Because of the growth in staff positions, space was becoming a problem. The committee felt that a comprehensive study was needed that would take into account options such as lease vs. purchase, location, future space needs, impact on staff for various scenarios, cost factors, and financing options. As a result of recommendations made by the (HSVC) in 1998, additional staff positions were added which increased the need for more office space. Temporary measures were taken to accommodate the new staff by converting the conference room, computer room, and reception area space into work areas. An Ad Hoc Committee on Headquarters Office Space (HOSC) was appointed by Larry Rothenberg in July of 1998 consisting of Ned Sternick, Jean St. Germain, Jim Deye, Sal Trofi and Melissa Martin as Chair. This committee reviewed proposals from several professional real estate service organizations and selected Ellen Herman of the Staubach Company to act as
the official professional real estate person on behalf of the AAPM. President Rothenberg gave the HOSC a charge that incorporated all the recommendations made by the HSVC. All these aspects were studied, including a visit to Florida locations by the consultant and the Executive Director.
Current Situation The AAPM leases space in the American Center for Physics building from the American Institute of Physics (AIP) and the American Physical Society (APS). The lease initially began in October of 1993. The lease cost was $36.00 per usable square foot (USF) and AAPM leased 1,860 USF. In August of 1996 the AAPM increased the amount of space occupied to 3,020 USF. Due to adjustments of operating expenses and other landlord expenses the most current rent is $43.84 per USF. The current lease has an end date of August 31, 2001.
Professional Lease Negotiations The HOSC had a series of negotiations with AIP/APS. The results of the negotiation, with the help of the consultant, resulted in a final proposal of $32.29 per USF. This is less than the $43.84 per USF we are currently paying and much better than a previous offer of $48.38 per USF made by AIP/APS. The new space would result in an increase to
7
5,974 USF from the current 3,020 USF. The $32.29 per USF includes operating expenses, 200 USF of storage space in the basement, receptionist and coffee services, mailing and clerical services, technical support services for computers, and the use of the building infrastructure for LAN and WAN connections.
Lease Timing The new lease will start on January 1, 2001 and run for 10 years with two five-year options to renew. Build-out of the new space will begin on September 1, 2000 with an anticipated completion date of December 31, 2000. This schedule was selected because it will cause the least disruption to the headquarters operations. The planning, vendor selection, materials ordering, and construction phases will take place prior to the AAPM annual meeting and actual construction will take place after the meeting.
Summary The unanimous recommendation of the HOSC was to
AAPM NEWSLETTER
MAY/JUNE 2000
lease more space at the ACP and to provide enough space to accommodate a staff of 20 (we now have 14 employees) over a 10-year period. The AAPM Executive Committee unanimously approved the acceptance of the lease offer, and authorized an e-mail ballot of the AAPM Board for
their approval. The AAPM Board of Directors by a vote of 33 in favor, none opposed, and none abstaining approved the lease offer. Four board members did not return a ballot. All members of the HOSC want to express our appreciation to the AIP and APS for
negotiating with us on such a professional basis and allowing the AAPM to secure a permanent location for the next twenty years. The ACP building has many excellent features and will serve our organization well.
Rationale for Oral Examinations for Medical Physics By Bhudhatt Paliwal ABR Trustee Madison, WI Having spent so many years of my life participating in oral examinations, I read with great interest Dr. Bushong’s letter to the Editor in the AAPM newsletter of November/December 1999. In his letter Dr. Bushong proposes to ‘bag the orals’. He argues that radiologists make their living interpreting images and therefore it is acceptable for them to have an oral exam. On the other hand medical physicists “collect data, analyze the results of measurements, make judgements of equipment performance, supervise treatment planning.” Dr. Bushong suggests that these are precise objectives and therefore do not merit an oral examination. I differ with Dr. Bushong’s assessment in two ways: interpretive skills are necessary to the physicist who must review and optimize treatment plans. These skills are necessary and need to be evaluated. Second, the oral examination is not
about the nature of data; it is about assessing the capability of an individual to understand, analyze, and explain the implications of data to other professional and technical staff such as dosimetrists, therapists and physicians. The question is: Does the oral examination contribute added value to the certification exam process? Can the required skills be adequately evaluated via a written examination alone, or are there candidates who are unable to demonstrate orally adequate clinical capability after successful completion of the written exams? Needless to say, the founders of the certification programs, both the ABR and the ABMP, recognized and believed in the added value of the oral exam. Can the value of the for oral exam be quantified? The physics trustees of the American Board of Radiology, working with their psychometric expert, initiated a process in 1999 to address this issue. T he y be ga n t he p roc e s s by developing evaluation methods for increasing the
8
reliability and validity of the physics oral examination. This initiative prompted the development of a standardized oral scoring sheet that is machine-readable, allowing for the collection of individual case scores and rigorous statistical analysis of the data.. The results of the analysis will be published in future ABR and AAPM Newsletters. The information collected from the oral examination scoring sheets will be used to enhance the effectiveness of the examination. Statistical parameters such as difficulty and discrimination will add objectivity to the oral evaluation process. Exam validity will be enhanced by selectively choosing questions that per-
AAPM NEWSLETTER
form well. Furthermore, the new scoring sheet attempts to standardize the grading of individual cases by having examiners rate candidate per for mance on specific components related to each question. The components are Understanding/Context, Analysis/Deduction, Clarity of Explanation, and Clinical Context. Examiners are instructed to rate each of the key components before assigning an overall score to a candidate's per for mance on a question. The examiners are told that the final case score is not necessarily the average of the component scores, but that there should be a correlation
between the two. These instructions allow the components to be weighted both independently and with respect to their question-specific importance. For example, Analysis/Deduction might be weighted more heavily than Clarity of Explanation for one question, while in another question, the relative importance of these components may be reversed. The scoring sheet provides a means of assigning weights to the components and determining their validity. Utilization of the scoring sheet requires examiners to stay focused on the key components during the examination, thus
MAY/JUNE 2000
adding structure to the oral examination. Analysis of the 1999 physics oral scores (see figure) helps to clarify the role of the oral exam in evaluating candidates using the components on which the new scoring sheet is based. The data presented are preliminary and require additional cumulative sampling to fully evaluate the validity of the concept. This approach that the ABR physics trustees are taking should ultimately provide an objective determination of the value of an oral exam in the certification process. To take action on the oral examination without benefit of such data would be unwise.
1999 Physics Oral Score Analysis: Part Score Ratings • Score ratings (Understanding, Analysis, Explanation, & Clinical) are not equally weighted • In 4 of 5 categories, Clinical Context is the best predictor of an individual score when included (Exception Cat 2:Patient Related Measurements) Category 1: Radiation Protection & Patient Safety Category 2: Patient Related Measurements Category 3: Image Acquisition, Processing & Display Category 4: Calibration, Quality Control & Quality Assurance Category 5: Equipment
9
AAPM NEWSLETTER
MAY/JUNE 2000
Executive Director’s Column By Sal Trofi College Park, MD 2000 Summer School The 2000 AAPM Summer School “General Practice of Radiation Oncology in the Next Century” will be held July 29 - August 1, 2000 immediately following the World Congress. The Summer School will be held at Northern Illinois University in Dekalb, Illinois. Shuttle bus service will be available from the World Congress to the Summer School and return participants to departing airports at the end of the Summer School. You can access all this information on line via AAPM On-line at http://www.aapm.org. If you need additional information, please contact Nancy Vazquez at nvazquez@aapm.org or phone 301-209-3390. Chicago 2000 World Congress During the World Congress, AAPM functions will be held at the Sheraton Chicago. AAPM members are urged to make their housing reservations early as rooms at the Sheraton are selling fast. Reservations must be made by June 23. For housing reservation instructions and the most up-to-date information, please visit the Chicago 2000 web site at http://www.wc2000.org. Important dates approaching: June 19, Deadline for advance meeting registration, and June 23, deadline for housing reservations. The Chicago 2000 World Congress will include a Job
Fair. There will be a special area within the exhibit hall just for companies participating in the Job Fair. This will allow a presence for companies wanting to make new contacts and recruit new hires. Companies typically recruit for first job seekers as well as experienced engineers and medical physicists. Attendees seeking a job will electronically submit their resume for posting on the web and to be included in a Resume Book that will be distributed to the participating companies prior to the Chicago 2000 World Congress. More information can be found at http://www.wc2000.org. The Chicago 2000 World Congress technical exhibits will be held in Festival Hall on Level 2 of the Navy Pier. Visit the Chicago 2000 web site at http://www.wc2000.org to view the complete list of exhibiting companies, their booth locations and a description of their products and services. The exhibits will be open Monday, July 24 from Noon - 6:00 pm, Tuesday, July 25 and Wednesday, July 26 from 9:00 am - 6:00 pm and Thursday, July 27 from 8:00 am - Noon. The Message Center service has been greatly enhanced by the AAPM HQ staff. The system will be Internet based. Attendees will be able to communicate with one another and receive e-mails from outside the meeting. Phone-in and fax service will also be available. Attendees will be able to access their messages
10
from numerous terminals throughout the Navy Pier facility. In cooperation with the Chicago Housing Bureau, there will also be a Hotel Locator. This will allow attendees to search the database to determine which hotels attendees are utilizing. Headquarters Office Space News A report from the AAPM Treasurer, Melissa Martin, about the negotiations and the terms of the new lease of headquarters space can be found elsewhere in this issue of the AAPM Newsletter. I would like to report on the plans and schedule for the staff to occupy the new space. We have hired an architecture and interior design company to help us in this effort. The design development and construction documentation phase will be completed by midJune. The bidding, permit filling and contract negotiation phase will be completed by mid-July. The actual construction phase will not begin until the first week of September. This will allow the staff to manage the World Congress meeting without dealing with the dis-
AAPM NEWSLETTER
ruption of construction taking place. When construction begins, the staff will be temporarily relocated in empty space in the AIP offices. The construction will be completed by mid-December and the staff will occupy the space by the end of this year.
Staff News Sharon Cohen is currently on parenthood leave caring for her one month old daughter Alexandra Phoenix Dark. Sharon will return to work on June 5th and take on new responsibilities as my Executive Assistant. Replacing Sharon as
MAY/JUNE 2000
Receptionist is Magda RenaudDurham. Magda worked for AIP in their Statistics Department for one year. Previous to that, she worked for four years as an executive assistant and eight years as an insurance underwriter.
Announcements Improving Professional Communications By Nicolas Detorie Chair Public Education and Donald Frey Chair AAPM Education Council The American Association of Physicists in Medicine is undertaking a project to improve communication between the medical physics community and patient advocacy groups. Because of this initiative, the Public Education Committee is looking for AAPM members who are active in patient advocacy
groups. We are especially interested in members who are active in breast cancer, heart disease and prostate advocacy, but do not wish to limit our activities to these areas. If you would be interested in serving as a liaison between the AAPM and a patient advocacy group, please contact Nick Detorie, chair of the Public Education Committee. Limited funding is available for AAPM members to speak either to the executive boards or to general meetings of patient advocacy groups.
11
Guide to Professional Medical Physics Practice Available The updated revision of this popular work G u i d e t o Professional Medical Physics Practice, is now available. This valuable resource discusses setting up practices, contracts, professional relationships, benefits, and job descriptions. Revised under the chairmanship of Richard Morin it is available free to ACR members by password from the ACR Website www.acr.org,under Products/Sales. Non-members can purchase the Guide for $20 from ACR Publications, phone 800-227-7762.
AAPM NEWSLETTER
MAY/JUNE 2000
Relativity Problem Explaination, and A Message From Einstein By Robert Dixon Winston-Salem, NC
12
AAPM NEWSLETTER
MAY/JUNE 2000
CT Symposium Highlight of Southeastern Chapter Meeting By Wlad Sobol Birmingham, AL The annual meeting of the Southeastern Chapter was held in Asheville, North Carolina in March at the Grove Park Inn. Gary Barnes and Jon Trueblood, co-directors for the symposium, did a great job putting the symposium together. It was a spirited weekend, with attendance at well over 100 people enjoying the beautiful high country location. Kudos to Jon Trueblood who is retiring. He gave his farewell speech on continuing education He has run those programs for many years for the benefit of the entire AAPM membership. Jon says he looks forward to spending more time on his farm and sawmill in Iowa. The symposium highlighted the timely topic of spiral and
multi-slice CT, and featured Willi Kalender, a world renowned expert in CT from the University of Erlangen, Germany. Kalender spoke on several topics, including CT Organ and Effective Doses, and Spiral and Multi-Slice CT Principles Developed from 1990 - 2000. In addition, Marc Kachelriess, also of University of Erlangen, spoke on CT images and Reconstruction Algorithms, and Future Developments in Multi-Slice CT. Also, Kevin Smith, MD, Ph.D. of the University of Alabama, gave a clinical overview of CT, highlighting the Clinical Advantages of MultiSlice CT. The symposium was followed by the SEAAPM annual meeting, which focused on current issues in radiation therapy and diagnostic radiology. The 1999 SEAAPM best paper award was
13
presented to Jackie Wu and Daniel Bourland for "Morphology Guided Radiosurgery Treatment Planning and Optimization for Multiple Iscocenters." The best student paper award was presented to Chester Ramsey for "Quality Assurance for a Video Based Respiratory Gating System." I am happy to turn the gavel over to John Gibbons of Columbia, SC. „
AAPM NEWSLETTER
MAY/JUNE 2000
New AAPM Members January 1, 2000 to April 15, 2000
Full Broadstone, Steven Richard Burlington, MA Chen, Ing-Jane Lung Tan, TAIWAN Chiang, Alice M Burlington, MA Choi, David R - Calgary, AB, CANADA Diederich, Chris John San Francisco, CA Estivalet, Andre Bayonne, FRANCE Frick, Ronald W Honolulu, HI Goddu, SreeKrishna Murty Charleston, SC Jabouri, Al Safa Hutchinson, KS Lacy, Jeffrey L Houston, TX Meaney, Paul M. Hanover, NH Meyerand, M. Elizabeth Madison, WI Molteni, Roberto Des Plaines, IL Monastyrenko, Vladimir Jefferson Valley, NY Nghiem-Phu, Lan Miami, FL Onizuka, Yoshihiko Kurume, JAPAN Sorensen, Anthony F. Palo Alto, CA Su, Min-Ying Irvine, CA Turnbull, King R. Knoxville, TN Waker, Anthony John Deep River, ON, CANADA
Associate Bird, Richard Rives Ellicott City, MD
Corresponding Karssemeijer, Nico Nijmegen, NETHERLANDS Bor, Mehmet Dogan Ankara, TURKEY Borasi, Giovanni Reggio Emilia, ITALY Court, Laurence Edward Tokyo, JAPAN Fox, Chris David Adelaide, SA, AUSTRALIA Sanz, Dario Esteban Mendoza, ARGENTINA Veldkamp, Wouter NETHERLANDS
Junior Chase, Daniel James Cordova, TN Jang, Sunyoung Philadelphia, PA Julsrud, Erik Andrew Duluth, MN McKeon, Tara M Philadelphia, PA Naqvi, Shahid A Baltimore, MD Sun, Xiaosong (Sean) Rowland Heights, CA Vossler, Matthew Karl Pittsburgh, PA Yam, Chun-Shan Boston, MA Student Divani, Afshin Andre Buffalo, NY Belanger, Philippe - Montreal, QC, CANADA Bezrukiy, Nikita V. Pacific Palisades, CA Boedeker, Kirsten Lee Los Angeles, CA Boyd, Robert Arthur Houston, TX Chen, Lili Palo Alto, CA Duchesne, Simon - Montreal, QC, CANADA
14
Ellis, Yuri A Deerfield, IL Kalach, Nina - Ottawa, ON, CANADA Langer, Deanna Lyn Toronto, ON, CANADA Leafgren, Nathan Andrew Los Angeles, CA Li, Mei - Ottawa, ON, CANADA Lindsay, Patricia E London, ON, CANADA McCullough, Steven P Houston, TX Medina, Luis Alberto San Antonio, TX O'Daniel, Jennifer C Houston, TX Pugachev, Andrei B Stanford, CA Ross, Richard Edwin Madison, WI Ruiz Rodriguez, Juan-Carlos Valencia, SPAIN St. John, Theodore Jeffrey Gainesville, FL Tan, Denise - Montreal, QC, CANADA Wang, Zhou - Buffalo, NY Wieckowska, Bronislawa E San Antonio, TX Wise, Jerry Lee Lexington, KY Yoo, Sua Madison, WI Buckley, Lesley Ann Madison, WI Chen, Laigao Indianapolis, IN Haq, Kamran UL Las Vegas, NV Harris, Emma Jane London, ENGLAND Sandy, Victoria Lynne Lake Villa, IL Waidelich, Jacob M Madison, WI „
AAPM NEWSLETTER
15
MAY/JUNE 2000
AAPM NEWSLETTER
MAY/JUNE 2000
AAPM NEWSLETTER MANAGING EDITOR Marsha Dixon
EDITOR-IN-RESIDENCE Robert Dixon Send information to: Marsha Dixon Broadcast News Public Relations 201 Knollwood Street Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27104 (336) 721-9171 Phone (336) 721-0833 Fax e-mail: rdixon@rad.wfubmc.edu The AAPM newsletter is printed bi-monthly. Deadline to receive material for consideration is four to six weeks before mailing date. We welcome your entries, and encourage authors of articles to supply a photo. Please send material via e-mail, disks or mail. Faxes are encouraged as back-up, and are acceptable alone.
NEXT ISSUE July/August, 2000
DEADLINE June 15, 2000
MAIL DATE July 15, 2000
Editorial Board Benjamin Archer Bruce Curran Marsha Dixon Don Frey John Kent Richard Morin Alfred Smith
AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF PHYSICISTS IN MEDICINE One Physics Ellipse College Park, Maryland 20740-3846 (301) 209-3350 Phone (301) 209-0862 Fax e-mail: aapm@aapm.org http://www.aapm.org