Present Status and Future Aspects of Radiation Oncology in Korea.
- Author:
Seung Jae HUH
1
Author Information
1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. sjhuh@smc.samsung.co.kr
- Publication Type:Review
- Keywords:
Korean radiotherapy facilities;
Equipment;
Radiotherapy human resource;
Future planning
- MeSH:
Cobalt;
Humans;
Korea*;
Particle Accelerators;
Positron-Emission Tomography and Computed Tomography;
Protons;
Radiation Oncology*;
Radiotherapy
- From:The Journal of the Korean Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology
2006;24(4):211-216
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: An analysis of the infrastructure for radiotherapy in Korea was performed to establish a baseline plan in 2006 for future development. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The data were obtained from 61 radiotherapy centers. The survey covered the number of radiotherapy centers, major equipment and personnel. Centers were classified into technical level groups according to the IAEA criteria. RESULTS: 28,789 new patients were treated with radiation therapy in 2004. There were 104 megavoltage devices in 61 institutions, which included 96 linear accelerators, two Cobalt 60 units, three Tomotherapy units, two Cyberknife units and one proton accelerator in 2006. Thirty-five high dose rate remote after-loading systems and 20 CT-simulators were surveyed. Personnel included 132 radiation oncologists, 50 radiation oncology residents, 64 medical physicists, 130 nurses and 369 radiation therapy technologists. All of the facilities employed treatment-planning computers and simulators, among these thirty-two percent (20 facilities) used a CT-simulator. Sixty-six percent (40 facilities) used a PET/CT scanner, and 35% (22 facilities) had the capacity to implement intensity modulated radiation therapy. Twenty-five facilities (41%) were included in technical level 3 group (having one of intensity modulated radiotherapy, stereotactic radiotherapy or intra-operative radiotherapy system). CONCLUSION: Radiation oncology in Korea evolved greatly in both quality and quantity recently and demand for radiotherapy in Korea is increasing steadily. The information in this analysis represents important data to develop the future planning of equipment and human resources.
