Lisa Di Prospero

Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Are you Lisa Di Prospero?

Claim your profile

Publications (22)8.11 Total impact

  • [show abstract] [hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Providing cancer patients with more information regarding their treatments allows them to feel more in control, increases self efficacy, and can decrease anxiety. The aims of the present study were to develop an interprofessional group education session and to evaluate the usefulness and acceptability of this session. In addition, informational distress levels pre- and post-education were evaluated. A prostate radiation therapy (RT) education session was developed and facilitated by an interprofessional team. Topics discussed included how RT works, side effects and management, and support services available. Prior to the education session, participants reported their informational RT distress levels using the validated Distress Thermometer (DT). Post-education session, the DT was readministered. In addition, participants completed an acceptability survey to assess format, structure, and usefulness of the education session. Participants agreed that the session contained valuable and useful information helping them understand expectations during treatment, including resource availability, side effects and management, as well as procedural expectation during treatment. All stated they would recommend the session to other patients. The interprofessional nature of the sessions was deemed useful. Suggested areas for improvement included addition of a dietitian, information on long-term side effects, statistics of radiotherapy side effects, impact of radiotherapy on sexual function, and overall quality of life. The group education session significantly improved informational distress levels (p = 0.04). Educating prostate cancer patients utilizing an interprofessional group format can decrease anxiety and stress related to their RT treatment. Future development of group education sessions for other disease site groups may be valuable.
    Journal of Cancer Education 02/2014; · 0.88 Impact Factor
  • [show abstract] [hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The purposes of this exploratory study were to investigate the attitudes of radiation oncology professionals regarding interprofessional (IP) teaching and interprofessional education (IPE), to identify the challenges faced by radiation oncologists who teach within an IP context, and to discover new strategies to aid professionals teaching IP students. A questionnaire was developed through the review of existing literature on IPE using Medline. The proposed group of questions was selected by educators from different professions actively involved in IPE. The final revised questionnaire consisted of three main domains assessing the understanding of IP concepts, attitudes toward IP teaching and learning environments, and attitudes toward health-care teams. An open-ended comment section was included. The questionnaire was administered to health-care professionals (physicists, radiation oncologists, and radiation therapists) nationally through SurveyMonkey® (electronic survey). A total of 220 respondents provided demographic information. Half of these respondents indicated that they previously received education relating to IPE. A high level of agreement was received for nearly all the questions. There were no significant statistical differences among the three different professional respondent groups for any question. Overall, most of the respondents demonstrated a good knowledge and understanding of IP concepts and advocated IP training and collaboration.
    Journal of Cancer Education 02/2014; · 0.88 Impact Factor
  • Lisa Di Prospero
    Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences 01/2014; 45(1):6.
  • [show abstract] [hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To determine if older women with early stage breast cancer have sufficient decisional support during their breast cancer journey, a questionnaire-based study was conducted at the Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre, in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Women with stages I and II breast cancer, ≥60 years, were contacted upon completion of their adjuvant treatment. A questionnaire was developed based on focus groups, the literature, and consultation with patients and a multidisciplinary team of experts. The questionnaire was divided into six domains as follows: (1) information support surrounding diagnosis, (2) impact of cancer diagnosis on the patient, (3) quality of interaction with healthcare team, (4) decisional support from the healthcare team, (5) additional information needs surrounding treatment decision, and (6) information support during radiation treatment. Ninety-two of 137 patients approached were included in the analysis. Ninety percent were > 60 years at the time of diagnosis and 65 % had stage I invasive breast cancer. The majority of women received adequate decisional support during their cancer journey. Approximately 90 % of women indicated that they received a high level of support during their cancer diagnosis. We found no significant differences in overall decisional support based on age at diagnosis, education level, ethnicity, or the presence of co-morbidities. However, participants desired additional educational resources such as a worksheet, consultation summary, or workbook to assist in making a treatment decision. The majority of participants felt that they had sufficient support while making a treatment decision for breast cancer.
    Journal of Cancer Education 10/2013; · 0.88 Impact Factor
  • [show abstract] [hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The present study investigated health professionals' opinions about important questions that should be discussed with patients who may require post-prostatectomy radiotherapy. A 74-question survey was conducted among radiation oncologists, urologists, nurses, and radiation therapists involved in the care of prostate cancer patients. Survey questions covered six domains: understanding my situation and prostate cancer diagnosis, making a decision, radiotherapy: procedures involved, potential benefits, side effects, and my support network during radiation treatment. Respondents rated the importance of addressing these questions as either essential, important, no opinion, or avoid with a hypothetical post-prostatectomy case. The majority of questions were rated as either essential or important. There was disagreement between professions on essential questions, mostly between nurses and urologists in the side-effects domain. There was agreement between all professions regarding which questions should be avoided.
    Journal of Cancer Education 06/2013; · 0.88 Impact Factor
  • Kieng Tan, Krista Dawdy, Lisa Di Prospero
    [show abstract] [hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Within the academic clinical setting, radiation therapists are required to assess students' performance and competence as part of their clinical practice portfolio. Anecdotal feedback from the clinical setting identified challenges in assessment that emerged as a result of variation in who, how, and the context in which the assessment was being completed. A survey was distributed to gain insight into the current state of clinical competency assessment.MethodologyRadiation therapists (n = 75) from two affiliated clinical sites within an undergraduate program were surveyed. The online survey consisted of open and closed questions. The survey was divided into three principal themes on the assessment of clinical competence: (1) who completes the assessment, (2) how clinical competence is assessed, and (3) what measures are utilized in the assessment. The survey also captured the clinical experience and formal training in education and assessment of respondents.ResultsAll respondents were aware that clinical teaching was part of their portfolio, but only 45 (60.0%) enjoyed teaching students, 41 (55.4%) rated themselves as very comfortable assessing competence, and 69 (93.2%) were aware of documentation and support on how to evaluate. All collaborate with team members and slightly less with the clinical educators. Sixty-four (86.5%) defined successful competence as sustainability over a defined period of time, measuring both clinical knowledge and application.ConclusionsProcesses surrounding the assessment of clinical competence are congruent among all clinical teachers, supporting their reliability. Enhanced collaboration with clinical educators in both support and training will increase the validity of clinical assessment. In addition, to minimize variability in clinical assessment, the focus should be placed on training the assessors and not controlling the assessment process.RésuméContexteDans le milieu clinique universitaire, les radiothérapeutes doivent évaluer le rendement et les compétences des étudiants dans le cadre de leur portefeuille de pratique clinique. Le feedback anecdotique provenant du milieu clinique recense des défis d’évaluation qui ressortent de variations découlant de la personne qui effectue l’évaluation, de quelle façon et dans quel contexte. Un questionnaire a été distribué afin d’obtenir un aperçu de l’état actuel de l’évaluation des compétences cliniques.MéthodologieLes radiothérapeutes (n = 75) de deux sites cliniques affiliés à un programme d’étude de premier cycle ont fait l’objet du sondage, qui prenait la forme de questions ouvertes et fermées. Le sondage était divisé en trois thèmes principaux couvrant l’évaluation des compétences cliniques: 1) qui a effectué l’évaluation; 2) la façon dont la compétence clinique est évaluée; 3) quelles sont les mesures utilisées pour l’évaluation. Le questionnaire porte également sur l’expérience clinique et la formation structurée des répondants en enseignement ou en évaluation.RésultatsTous les répondants savaient que l’enseignement clinique faisait partie de leur portefeuille mais 45 seulement (60,0%) apprécient enseigner aux étudiants. Quarante-et-un répondants (55,4%) se disent très à l’aise pour évaluer les compétences, 69 (93,2%) savaient qu’il existe de la documentation et du soutien en matière d’évaluation. Tous collaborent avec les membres de leur équipe, et un peu moins avec les éducateurs cliniciens. Soixante-quatre (86,5%) définissent la compétence comme la durabilité sur une période de temps définie, mesurant à la fois les connaissances cliniques et leur application.Conclusions Les processus entourant l’évaluation de la compétence clinique sont congruents entre tous les enseignants cliniciens, ce qui en appuie la fiabilité. Une meilleure collaboration avec les éducateurs cliniciens en matière de soutien et de formation permettrait d’améliorer la validité de l’évaluation clinique. De plus, afin de minimiser la variabilité de l’évaluation clinique, l’accent devrait être mis sur la formation des évaluateurs et non sur le contrôle du processus d’évaluation.
    Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences 06/2013; 44(2):100–105.
  • Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences 03/2013; 44(1):48.
  • Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences 03/2013; 44(1):54.
  • Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences 03/2013; 44(1):14–22.
  • Lisa Di Prospero
    Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences 01/2013; 44(4):171.
  • John Maamoun, Margaret I. Fitch, Lisa Di Prospero
    [show abstract] [hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objectifs Les personnes qui reçoivent des traitements de radiothérapie pour un cancer peuvent avoir un éventail de besoins de soins de soutien qu’ils ne reçoivent souvent pas. Un outil de dépistage a été conçu et mis à l’essai afin d’en déterminer les propriétés psychométriques (caractéristiques techniques) dans le but d’aider les radiothérapeutes à reconnaître rapidement les patients ayant besoin d’interventions supplémentaires dans le cadre de leurs traitements de radiothérapie, permettant un aiguillage rapide et facilitant la prestation de soins de soutien de qualité, approfondis et centrés sur le patient. Méthodes Un outil de dépistage complet et détaillé a été élaboré afin de déterminer les préoccupations et le niveau de détresse du patient, de saisir le souhait du patient d’être aidé lorsqu’il éprouve des préoccupations données et d’informer le Centre des soins alternatifs offerts. L’outil a été administré simultanément avec l’instrument normalisé de qualité de vie (EORTC QLQ-30). Cent quinze patients de radiothérapie ont rempli les deux questionnaires à trois reprises; la deuxième fois après deux jours, et la troisième fois, deux semaines plus tard. Afin de mesurer la fiabilité et la sensibilité du nouvel instrument, le degré d’accord entre les réponses des deux premières occasions et entre la première et la troisième administration a été analysé pour les deux instruments. Les corrélations entre les réponses aux deux instruments ont également été examinées afin d’établir la validité concurrente. Résultats Le test de McNemar et le coefficient Kappa simple montrent un degré élevé d’accord entre les notes du nouvel outil de dépistage lors de la comparaison entre les résultats de la première et de la deuxième occasion. Lorsque les réponses de la première et de la troisième occasion sont comparées, le test précédent montre un glissement vers un degré d’accord moins élevé sur tous les points notés. Le test plus récent montre un changement dans plus de 97,7 % des points, avec une diminution du degré d’accord. La sensibilité au changement du nouvel outil a également été renforcée par les données de l’outil validé EORTC QLQ-C30, qui montre un changement similaire dans le temps; le coefficient de corrélation de Pearson a respectivement diminué en moyenne de 0,75 à 0,58 pour la première et la deuxième comparaison, avec toutes les valeurs P < .0001. La validité concurrente a été jugée acceptable. Conclusion Le nouvel outil de dépistage est fiable et sensible, avec une validité acceptable. On s’attend à ce que l’intervention de dépistage permette aux radiothérapeutes de normaliser et de formaliser leur approche des soins de soutien dans les cliniques externes de radiothérapie et augmente leur capacité de reconnaître les préoccupations des patients et d’y répondre en temps opportun.
    Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences 01/2013; 44(3):141–149.
  • Lisa Di Prospero
    Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences 01/2013; 44(4):167–168.
  • Lisa Di Prospero
    Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences 01/2013; 44(3):121–122.
  • Lisa Di Prospero
    Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences 01/2013; 44(3):122–123.
  • Lisa Di Prospero
    Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences 01/2013; 44(4):172.
  • Lisa Di Prospero
    Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences 01/2013; 44(4):169–170.
  • Cindy Tran, Ewa Szumacher, Lisa Di Prospero
    [show abstract] [hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: PurposeTreatment-related information is the most important informational need of cancer patients and online media sources are gaining popularity as a cancer communication method. Our aim was to determine if new multilanguage patient online education modules in radiation therapy are usable and beneficial for the multicultural cancer patient population who may face language barriers.Methods Eight new patients from the radiation oncology clinic at the Odette Cancer Centre (OCC) were recruited to participate in the study over a 3-month period. Testing involved a combination of interviewing, observation, think-aloud methodology, and short survey. Results were analyzed using thematic analysis of responses to the interviews and open-ended survey questions, in addition to Likert scale ratings.ResultsPatients were satisfied with the survey (mean = 96/100) and indicated a high usability score citing the general ease of navigation and clear presentation of information. The usefulness mean score was relatively lower; participants wanted more specific information related to their treatment site and anticipated side effects. There was no consensus on the accessibility of the module. Although all participants appreciated the multilanguage capabilities of the modules, they indicated that the number of languages represented in the modules should be increased.ConclusionMultilanguage online modules were a good communication tool for patients; however, improvements on the content and language availability were indicated by the study participants.RésuméButL’information reliée au traitement représente le besoin d’information le plus important pour les patients atteints d’un cancer et les sources en ligne gagnent en popularité comme méthodes de communication sur le cancer. Notre but consistait à déterminer si les nouveaux modules multilingues d’éducation en ligne des patients étaient utilisables et bénéfiques pour la population multiculturelle de patients atteints du cancer, qui peuvent être confrontés à des obstacles linguistiques.MéthodologieHuit nouveaux patients de la clinique de radio-oncologie du Centre de cancer Odette (CCO) ont été recrutés afin de prendre part à cette étude d’une durée de trois mois. Les tests comprenaient une combinaison d’entrevues, d’observation, de réflexion à voix haute et un bref sondage. Les résultats ont été analysés par le biais d’une analyse thématique des réponses à l’entrevue et aux questions ouvertes du sondage, en plus du classement selon l’échelle de Likert.RésultatsLes patients se sont dits satisfaits du sondage (moyenne = 96/100) et ont accordé une note élevée pour la convivialité, citant notamment la facilité générale de navigation et la présentation claire de l’information. La note moyenne pour l’utilité a été relativement plus basse; les participants souhaitent de l’information plus précise sur le site de traitement et sur les effets secondaires prévus. Il n’y a pas eu de consensus sur l’accessibilité des modules d’information. Bien que tous les patients en aient apprécié la capacité multilingue, ils ont indiqué que le nombre de langues devrait être augmenté.Conclusion Les modules d’information multilingues en ligne sont un bon outil de communication pour les patients, mais les participants à l’étude ont indiqué que des améliorations devaient être apportées au contenu et au nombre de langues.
    Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences 09/2012; 43(3):181–186.
  • [show abstract] [hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To examine whether treatment workload and complexity associated with palliative radiation therapy contribute to medical errors. In the setting of a large academic health sciences center, patient scheduling and record and verification systems were used to identify patients starting radiation therapy. All records of radiation treatment courses delivered during a 3-month period were retrieved and divided into radical and palliative intent. "Same day consultation, planning and treatment" was used as a proxy for workload and "previous treatment" and "multiple sites" as surrogates for complexity. In addition, all planning and treatment discrepancies (errors and "near-misses") recorded during the same time frame were reviewed and analyzed. There were 365 new patients treated with 485 courses of palliative radiation therapy. Of those patients, 128 (35%) were same-day consultation, simulation, and treatment patients; 166 (45%) patients had previous treatment; and 94 (26%) patients had treatment to multiple sites. Four near-misses and 4 errors occurred during the audit period, giving an error per course rate of 0.82%. In comparison, there were 10 near-misses and 5 errors associated with 1100 courses of radical treatment during the audit period. This translated into an error rate of 0.45% per course. An association was found between workload and complexity and increased palliative therapy error rates. Increased complexity and workload may have an impact on palliative radiation treatment discrepancies. This information may help guide the necessary recommendations for process improvement for patients who require palliative radiation therapy.
    International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics 06/2012; 84(1):e43-8. · 4.59 Impact Factor
  • Lisa Di Prospero, Sheena Bhimji-Hewitt
    [show abstract] [hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Small group learning is an interactive activity that requires a skilled teacher with the ability to facilitate and debrief. Approximately 250 students from seven health professions were enrolled in a first year interprofessional education course that focused on the importance of communication and collaboration. Weekly faculty debrief sessions were conducted and were utilized to share the teachers perspectives with facilitative teaching as well as for feedback and improvement strategies. Recommendations included linking the learning within the small group sessions back to clinical and professional practice in order to validate the course content and thereby increase student engagement; creation of facilitator guides with specific debrief instructions for the given objectives in order to encourage effective learning dialogue among all participants; and providing faculty with formalized facilitator training as well as debrief strategies in order to attain the skills to better guide student learning.
    Journal of allied health 11/2011; 40(4):61E-65E.
  • Lisa Di Prospero, Sheena Bhimji-Hewitt
    [show abstract] [hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: IntroductionAt the Michener Institute for Applied Health Sciences, an interprofessional education (IPE) curriculum has been integrated into all health professional programs. A significant component of the introductory course in this IPE curriculum is on teamwork.
    Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences 01/2011; 42(3):118-123.