Retrospective Analysis of Treatment Workflow in Frame-Based and Frameless Gamma Knife Radiosurgery

Objective To improve the efficiency of frame-based and frameless Gamma Knife® Icon™ (GKI) treatments by analyzing the workflows of both treatment approaches and identifying steps that lead to prolonged patient in-clinic or treatment time. Methods The treatment processes of 57 GKI patients, 16 frame-based and 41 frameless cases were recorded and analyzed. For frame-based treatments, time points were recorded for various steps in the process, including check-in, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) completion, plan approval, and treatment start/end times. The time required for completing each step was calculated and investigated. For frameless treatments, the actual and planned treatment times were compared to evaluate the patient tolerance of the treatment. In addition, the time spent on room cleaning and preparation between treatments was also recorded and analyzed. Results For frame-based cases, the average in-clinic time was 6.3 hours (ranging from 4 to 8.7 hours). The average time from patient check-in to plan approval was 4.2 hours (ranging from 2.8 to 5.5 hours), during which the frame was placed, stereotactic reference MRI images were taken, target volumes were contoured, and the treatment plan was developed and second-checked. For patients immobilized with a mask, treatment pauses triggered by the intra-fractional motion monitoring system resulted in a significantly longer actual treatment time than the planned time. In 50 (or 55%) of the 91 frameless treatments, the patient on-table time was longer than the planned treatment time by more than 10 minutes, and in 19 (or 21%) of the treatments the time difference was larger than 20 minutes. Major treatment interruptions, defined as pauses leading to a longer than 10-minute delay, were more commonly encountered in patients with a planned treatment time longer than 40 minutes, which accounted for 64% of the recorded major interruptions. Conclusion For frame-based cases, the multiple pretreatment steps (from patient check-in to plan approval) in the workflow were time-consuming and resulted in prolonged patient in-clinic time. These pretreatment steps may be shortened by performing some of these steps before the treatment day, e.g., pre-planning the treatment using diagnostic MRI scans acquired a few days earlier. For frameless patients, we found that a longer planned treatment time is associated with a higher chance of treatment interruption. For patients with a long treatment time, a planned break or consideration of fractionated treatments (i.e., 3 to 5 fractionated stereotactic radiosurgery) may optimize the workflow and improve patient satisfaction.