Stories at Work: Writing to Learn, Care, and Collaborate in Radiation Therapy

see a department with a 69 year old, 52 year old, 46 year old, 31 year old and a 20 year old all working together and trying to find common ground. Due to the recession and the fall of the dot.com marketplace, retirement savings and pensions were heavily depleted resulting in the ‘‘Boomers’’ having to work longer than anyone expected, 63% plan to work part-time after retirement, with 5% planning to never retire (from a AARP survey of 2000 boomers). Clashes between the generations is not a completely new experience, in the 1960’s it was the Boomers against the Veterans, however there were really only 2 generations involved in the workplace at that time, as women would generally leave to have their children and then perhaps return to work later in life. Working within a multi generational workforce has never been more complicated than it is today. Could understanding the generational differences help us to connect in a positive way with each other, restoring a harmony many seem to remember from the past, to our departments? Or is there more than one factor affecting how people are interacting with each other? The evolution of radiation science is an amazing journey taken in a relatively short span of time. It is not surprising to hear sentiments from experienced staff indicating that this job as it is today ‘‘is not what they signed up for’’. Blaming age differences for unrest between work colleagues is becoming a universal cry, however this does not make it a fact. Generations is a general term and not a rule, we must avoid stereotyping or even alienating people with our assumptions on their behavior due to their age. Mobilisation Strategies in Higher Education Prof Geoffrey Currie, BPharm, MMedRadSc, MAppMngt, MBA, PhD Charles Sturt University In the higher education sector, there has been an evolution in student expectations and academic expectations that requires institutions to develop new models of sustainability. Mobilisation of the learning environment is an important priority to both meet demands and provide sustainability. Students expect a flexible or mobile learning environment and an emerging trend amongst academics is a preference for non-traditional classroom environments. Mobilisation of the education environment provides a competitive advantage in both student and academic markets while delivering a more sustainable business model. Moreover, mobilisation facilitates other key strategies like internationalisation, cross institution collaboration and research. This poster provides an insight into strategies employed for mobilisation of Medical Radiation Science (MRS) education at a regional university while ensuring enhancement of service and product delivery. Central to the successful implementation of mobilisation strategies at Charles Sturt University (CSU) is the iPad as an educational tool. The iPad has transformed the higher education landscape spawning the term padagogy. In MRS at CSU, the iPad enhances service delivery, extends the boundaries of the classroom and engages students in education more broadly and deeply. There are, however, limitations that need to be recognised in planning. Key limitations relate to inappropriate use; the iPad is not equipped to make other technologies redundant but rather it is a value added proposition. The iPad might be best seen as extending portability of a resource rich educational environment. This poster also provides an insight into the role of some of those apps. Mobilisation extends the classroom boundaries to include social media. Given that students engage in social media, including within the classroom environment, academics have the opportunity to harness that environment. This poster explores the role of social media in higher education and responsibilities in hidden curriculum education as a deliverable. Social media is an environment students feel ownership of (as opposed to university administered online environments) which facilitates improved communication, problem solving and authentic student reflection. Social media not only fosters professionalism, but it also develops trust and respect amongst students and with academics.

Stories at Work: Writing to Learn, Care, and Collaborate in Radiation Therapy Kari Osmar, MRT(T), BSc, MEd.a and Sarah Whyte, PhD(c)b a Odette Cancer Centre b University of Waterloo

Background: Professional training programs have begun to teach health professionals how to write and read stories. Education sessions in narrative writing have been shown to increase empathy and well-being among medical students and practicing doctors. These approaches have not been studied in radiation oncology, and they have not been extensively used with interprofessional groups. We know little about how narrative writing sessions might affect practice. Methods: Experiential narrative writing workshops were offered in two phases. The first phase involved a 90-minute introductory workshop offered to four separate groups of 10 participants each: practicing radiation therapists (2), radiation therapists and oncology nurses together, and radiation therapy students. The second phase involved a narrative writing course consisting of 4 x 60-minute sessions. Participants from first phase were together for this course. In both phases, the sessions were similar in their approach. Under the guidance of an experienced facilitator, participants were introduced to the process of writing and sharing vignettes, listening to others’ stories, and providing and receiving feedback. These workshops were the educational component of our project. The research component was supplementary. It involved (1) observations by a trained researcher and (2) follow-up interviews, conducted after the conclusion of the course. This research component helped us to determine how the narrative writing courses work in our setting and what effects they have on participants’ subsequent experience and practice. Results: The narrative writing course was extremely well received. Participants have described the course as rewarding, significant, profound, illuminating, fulfilling, and a privilege. Effects on practice are currently being explored through analysis of field notes and interviews from the narrative writing workshops. Preliminary findings suggest that narrative writing can improve communication, relieve stress, and spark genuine reflection and continuous learning. Discussion and Conclusion: The use of narrative writing, to write stories at work not about work brought pleasure, perspective, a sense of connection and community to participants. Ongoing voluntary introductory workshops offered at both the undergraduate level and to staff may provide avenues to continue to build teams, reminding us of the stories that both our patients and colleagues have to share with us.

POSTER PRESENTATIONS TOP RANKED INQUIRE POSTER

Phase III Randomized Pair Comparison of a Barrier Film vs. Standard Skin Care in Preventing Radiation Dermatitis in Women with Breast Cancer Receiving Adjuvant Radiation Therapy M. Rempel, BA, MRT(T), D. McGregor, BSc, MRT(T), M. Lock, BSc Hon, MD, CCFP, FCFP, FRCPC and E. Yu, MD, PhD, FRCPC London Regional Cancer Program Objectives: Breast radiotherapy patients often experience radiation dermatitis. In post-lumpectomy patients, the intact breast, axilla, and infra-mammary fold are risk for friction dermatitis. Dermatitis is painful, impacts quality of life, and can necessitate treatment break/cessation. A 2004 study by Graham et al found the use of prophylactic barrier film (BF) by mastectomy radiation patients resulted in reduction of >grade 2 toxicity and rate of moist desquamation/pruritis. Our objectives are to assess the efficacy of 3MÔ CavilonÔ No Sting BF in preventing radiation dermatitis grade 2, to determine time to onset, to evaluate the effect of BF use on quality of life, pain/pruritis scores, and to complete a cost comparison in the post-lumpectomy patient population. Methods: A phase III randomized paired comparison is currently in progress (accrual at 21/64 patients). Pertinent inclusion criteria includes: post-lumpectomy, age 18-80, no prescribed boost/bolus, standard dose (42.5Gy/16 or 50Gy/25), ability to comply with study requirements. Patients are randomized to receive BF medially or laterally and the breast is divided into quadrants for assessment purposes. BF is applied twice weekly by radiation therapists while the patient is on treatment. Skin toxicity is evaluated weekly by a

Conference Proceedings from RTi3 2014/Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences 45 (2014) 162-188

175