Skip to main content

A survey of modulated radiotherapy use in Australia & New Zealand in 2015


A survey of radiation oncology medical physics departments across Australia and New Zealand was conducted to assess the usage, commissioning and quality assurance of modulated radiotherapy techniques such as IMRT and VMAT. Survey responses were collected in April–May 2015 to snapshot current practice and historical implementation. The survey asked 142 questions, and is the most detailed survey of its kind published to date. Analysis of results at overall department level, as well as sub-analysis for different equipment and techniques in use, was performed. Results show a high prevalence of IMRT and VMAT in use, and demonstrate the large heterogeneity in clinical practice and experience across the region.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8


  1. Webb S (2001) Intensity-modulated radiation therapy. IOP Publishing, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  2. The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists—Faculty of Radiation Oncology Board (2012) Position Paper: Techniques and Technologies 2015 HORIZON SCAN AUSTRALIA

  3. Tribius S, Bergelt C (2011) Intensity-modulated radiotherapy versus conventional and 3D conformal radiotherapy in patients with head and neck cancer: is there a worthwhile quality of life gain? Cancer Treat Rev 37(7):511–519

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Nutting CM, Morden JP, Harrington KJ, Urbano TG, Bhide SA, Clark C, Miles EA, Miah AB, Newbold K, Tanay M, Adab F, Jefferies SJ, Scrase C, Yap BK, A’Hern RP, Sydenham MA, Emson M, Hall E (2011) Parotid-sparing intensity modulated versus conventional radiotherapy in head and neck cancer (PARSPORT): a phase 3 multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 12(2):127–136

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. McDonald MW, Godette KD, Whitaker DJ, Davis LW, Johnstone PA (2010) Three-year outcomes of breast intensity-modulated radiation therapy with simultaneous integrated boost. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 77(2):523–530

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Staffurth J (2010) A review of the clinical evidence for intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Clin Oncol 22(8):643–657

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Ezzell GA, Burmeister JW, Dogan N, LoSasso TJ, Mechalakos JG, Mihailidis D, Molineu A, Palta JR, Ramsey CR, Salter BJ, Shi J, Xia P, Yue NJ, Xiao Y (2009) IMRT commissioning: multiple institution planning and dosimetry comparisons, a report from AAPM Task Group 119. Med Phys 36(11):5359–5373

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Ezzell GA, Galvin JM, Low D, Palta JR, Rosen I, Sharpe MB, Xia P, Xiao Y, Xing L, Yu CX (2003) Guidance document on delivery, treatment planning, and clinical implementation of IMRT: report of the IMRT Subcommittee of the AAPM Radiation Therapy Committee. Med Phys 30(8):2089–2115

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Alber M, Broggi S, De Wagter C, Eichwurzel I, Engstrom P, Fiorino C, Georg D (2005) Guidelines for the verification of IMRT. Radiother Oncol 76:S101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. American College of Radiology (2016) ACR practice parameter for Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT).

  11. Nederlandse Commissie Voor Stralingsdosimetrie, N Commissie, V Stralingsdosimetrie, and Nederlandse Commissie Voor Stralingsdosimetrie, “Code of Practice for the Quality Assurance and Control for Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy,” no. June, 2013

  12. Nederlandse Commissie Voor Stralingsdosimetrie, “Code of Practice for the Quality Assurance and Control for Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy,” no. February, p 65, 2015

  13. Nelms BE, Simon JA (2007) A survey on planar IMRT QA analysis. 8(3):76–90

  14. Pulliam K, Kerns J, Howell R, Followill D, O’Daniel J, Kry S (2014) MO-G-BRE-02: a survey of IMRT QA practices for more than 800 institutions. Med Phys 41(6):432–432

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Abolaban F, Zaman S, Cashmore J, Nisbet A, Clark CH (2016) Changes in patterns of intensity-modulated radiotherapy verification and quality assurance in the UK. Clin Oncol 28(8):e28–e34

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Kumar R (2010) A survey on the quality assurance procedures used in intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) at Indian hospitals. J Cancer Sci Ther 2(6):166–170

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Siochi RAC, Molineu A, Orton CG (2013) Point/counterpoint. Patient-specific QA for IMRT should be performed using software rather than hardware methods. Med Phys 40(7):70601

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. RANZCR (2012) Radiation Oncology Tripartite National Strategic Plan 2012–2022

  19. Bridge P, Dempsey S, Giles E, Maresse S, Mccorkell G, Opie C, Wright C, Carmichael MA (2015) Practice patterns of radiation therapy technology in Australia: results of a national audit. J Med Radiat Sci 62(4):253–260

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Van Esch A, Bohsung J, Sorvari P, Tenhunen M, Paiusco M, Iori M, Engström P, Nyström H, Huyskens DP (2002) Acceptance tests and quality control (QC) procedures for the clinical implementation of intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) using inverse planning and the sliding window technique: experience from five radiotherapy departments. Radiother Oncol 65(1):53–70

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Ling CC, Zhang P, Archambault Y, Bocanek J, Tang G, LoSasso T (2008) Commissioning and quality assurance of rapidarc radiotherapy delivery system. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 72(2):575–581

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Klein EE, Hanley J, Bayouth J, Yin F-F, Simon W, Dresser S, Serago C, Aguirre F, Ma L, Arjomandy B, Liu C, Sandin C, Holmes T (2009) Task Group 142 report: quality assurance of medical accelerators. Med Phys 36(9):4197

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Low DA, Harms WB, Mutic S, Purdy JA (1998) A technique for the quantitative evaluation of dose distributions. Med Phys 25(5):656–661

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Knöös T, Wieslander E, Cozzi L, Brink C, Fogliata A, Albers D, Nyström H, Lassen S (2006) Comparison of dose calculation algorithms for treatment planning in external photon beam therapy for clinical situations. Phys Med Biol. 51(22):5785–5807,

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Ojala JJ, Kapanen MK, Hyödynmaa SJ, Wigren TK, Pitkänen MA (2014) Performance of dose calculation algorithms from three generations in lung SBRT: comparison with full Monte Carlo-based dose distributions. 15(2):4–18

  26. Kruse JJ (2010) On the insensitivity of single field planar dosimetry to IMRT inaccuracies. Med Phys 37(6):2516–2524

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. McKenzie EM, Balter PA, Stingo FC, Jones J, Followill DS, Kry SF (2014) Toward optimizing patient-specific IMRT QA techniques in the accurate detection of dosimetrically acceptable and unacceptable patient plans. Med Phys 41(12):121702

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Nelms BE, Chan MF, Jarry G, Lemire M, Lowden J, Hampton C, Feygelman V, Chan MF, Lowden J, Feygelman V (2013) Evaluating IMRT and VMAT dose accuracy: practical examples of failure to detect systematic errors when applying a commonly used metric and action levels. Med Phys 40(11):111722

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Pulliam KB, Followill D, Court L, Dong L, Gillin M, Prado K, Kry SF (2014) A six-year review of more than 13,000 patient-specific IMRT QA results from 13 different treatment sites. J Appl Clin Med Phys 15(5):4935

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. T. Australian Government Department of Health (2016) 1 January 2016 MBS files [Online] Accessed 05 Jan 2016

Download references


Many thanks to the members of the NSW/ACT branch committee of the ACPSEM for their help in the development of the survey over several years. The survey data was used to plan an IMRT workshop in Wollongong 2015, and the authors appreciated the valuable discussions from workshop participants.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jeffrey Barber.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (PDF 585 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Barber, J., Vial, P., White, P. et al. A survey of modulated radiotherapy use in Australia & New Zealand in 2015. Australas Phys Eng Sci Med 40, 811–822 (2017).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI:


  • IMRT
  • VMAT
  • Modulated therapy