Clinical risk analysis of the patient’s path in an Advanced Radiotherapy Center (A.R.C.) through F.M.E.A. method


Claudio Pobbiati
Massimo Monturano
Andrea Vavassori
Marianna Gerardi
Massimo Sarra Fiore
Elena Rondi
Enrica Borghetti
Fabio Castellini
Valerio Scroffi
Camilla Arrobbio
Fabiana Castelluccia
Valeria Gandellini
Saverio Greco
Assuntina Leppa
Barbara Alicja Jereczek-Fossa


Starting from the increasing requirement of efficient access to healthcare, the study aims to assess the current standard procedures in order to optimize safety and quality.

The decision to study the patient's process in Radiotherapy (RT) by FMEA methodology (Failure Mode and Effect Analysis), in order to identify and manage the risks for patients, arose from an interest of both the Radiotherapy Division and the Management of the European Institute of Oncology (IEO) IRCSS of Milan (Italy) in consideration of its high activity and of the volume of patients treated. The department has undergone a remarkable change in the last seven years, by increasing the number of accelerators and the number of patients treated, which rose from 2.197 (2011) to 3.194 (2017).

Treatment modalities and timing of each session have changed: nowadays the majority of the patients receive highly complex treatments (intensity-modulated radiotherapy, image-guided radiotherapy, stereotactic radiotherapy, etc.).


The purpose of this study is to define an instrument of practical use and maintenance, for the proactive management of clinical risk by analysing the patient’s care path in RT: from his medical examination to the discharge and the next follow-up visits.

The instrument was tested by handing it out to employees in the form of a questionnaire, trying to involve a significant pool of professionals.

Materials and methods

Starting from previous Institutional experiences of FMEA studies in other clinical areas, we decided to:

  • make-up several multidisciplinary working groups (with one or two members of each professional level) in order to define the sub-processes, the failure mode and the impact of potential damage.
  • propose the participation of radiotherapy professionals in defining the frequency of the failure mode in their experience, using questionnaires and scales of predefined values.

To define the value "potential damage" and the attribution of the frequency of occurrence of the various failure modes, we sought to minimize a potentially non-voluntary effect of mitigating the risk due to the awareness of the correlations between frequency of occurrence and damage.

Therefore, the professionals involved were not aware of the results.


The study was carried out with great participation from the professionals involved in the patient's path (88,6% of the staff involved in the study responded to the questionnaires administered in the first part of the study; 69,7% was the rate of participation in the second part). This result allowed to overcome the subjective limitations due to the low numerical representation and the lack of objective epidemiological data concerning the near miss. Forty-four criticalities were found (14% of all the failure) and required intervention planning.


This work led to the definition of a model with analytical description and quantification of the clinical risk for all the failure modes by "Risk Priority Number" (RPN) of all the sub-processes of the patient's path. Starting from the significant result of the areas requiring intervention, we could identify several improvement actions to reduce clinical risk. The model allows a dynamic management of clinical risk linked to a specific process and it could be exported to other Radiotherapy Centers.


I dati di download non sono ancora disponibili


Come citare
Pobbiati, C., Monturano, M., Vavassori, A., Gerardi, M., Sarra Fiore, M., Rondi, E., Borghetti, E., Castellini, F., Scroffi, V., Arrobbio, C., Castelluccia, F., Gandellini, V., Greco, S., Leppa, A., & Jereczek-Fossa, B. A. (2019). Clinical risk analysis of the patient’s path in an Advanced Radiotherapy Center (A.R.C.) through F.M.E.A. method. Journal of Biomedical Practitioners, 3(1).

Riferimenti bibliografici

[1] Novaco F, Damen V: “La gestione del rischio clinico”, Centro Scientifico Editore, Torino, 2004

[2] D’Emilio G: “Analisi e gestione del rischio clinico e applicazione alle macchine della radioterapia”, Tesi di Laurea Politecnico di Milano, relatore: Marcello Crivellini – aa 2011/2012

[3] Huq MS, Fraass BA, Dunscombe PB, et al.: “The report of Task Group 100 of the AAPM: application of risk analysis methods to radiation therapy quality management”, Med. Phys. 2016; 43:4209-4262

[4] “Ministero della Salute” – Temi e Professioni – Qualità e Sicurezza delle cure – Governo Clinico, Qualità e Sicurezza delle cure – “Sicurezza dei Pazienti e Gestione del Rischio Clinico: Manuale per la formazione degli operatori sanitari”,

[5] Choi WH and Cho J: “Evolving Clinical cancer radiotherapy: concerns regarding normal tissue protection and quality assur-ance”, J Korean Med Sci 2016 feb: 31 (suppl):s75-s87

[6] Villari et al.: “Diagnostica per Immagini, Medicina Nucleare e Radioterapia”, Piccin Nuova Libraria S.p.A., 2011, Padova

[7] Pobbiati C.: “Verifica del Set-up nel paziente affetto da carcinoma prostatico mediante CBCT: variabilità inter-observer”, Tesi di Laurea Università degli studi di Milano – relatore: Dott.ssa Barbara Alicja Jereczek – aa 2010/2011

[8] Autori Vari: “La Gestione del Rischio Clinico nella Moderna Radioterapia”, Supplemento a UROTIME Vol. XXIII, n. 1/2011, CIC Edizioni Internazionali

[9] W.H.O. “Quality Assurance in Radiotherapy”. 1998


[11] Regione Emilia Romagna - Agenzia Sanitaria Regionale – “Fmea-Fmeca: Analisi dei Modi di Errore/Guasto e dei loro effetti nelle Organizzazioni Sanitarie” – Sussidi per la gestione del rischio 1, Dossier 75–2002

[12] Shuller BW, Burns A, Ceilley EA, et al.: “Failure Mode and Effects Analysis: a community practice perspective”, J. Appl. Clin. Med. Phys. 2017; 18:6:258-267

[13] Yuanguang XU A, Bhatnagar J, Bednarz G, et al.: “Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) for Gamma Knife Radiosurgery”, J. Appl. Clin. Med. Phys 2017; 18:6:152-168

[14] Tonigan Faught J, Balter A, Johnson L, et al.: “An FMEA evaluation of intensity modulated radiation therapy dose delivery failures at tolerance criteria levels”, Med. Phys. 2017; 44:5575-5583

[15] Frewen H, Brown E, Jenkins M, O’Donovan A: “Failure Mode and Effects Analysis in a paperless radiotherapy department”, Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology 2018; 62:707-715

[16] Veronese I, De Martin E, Martinotti AS, et al.: “Multi-Institutional application of Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) to Cyberknife Stereotatctic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT)”, Rad. Oncology 2015; 10:132

[17] Autori Vari: “Approccio prospettico alla sicurezza del paziente nella moderna RT”, Report AIFM N°8 2012 – a cura del Grup-po di Lavoro: Approccio prospettico per rischio incidenti in nuove tecnologie RT

[18] Farina M, Pineider C: “La gestione del rischio clinico – L’applicazione della Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA) per la riduzione del rischio clinico in Radioterapia Oncologica”, EmmEffe S.r.l., Milano, 2010 (con il patrocinio di: Associazione Italiana di Radioterapia Oncologica)

[19] Ministero della Salute - “Risk Management in Sanità: il problema degli errori”. Commissione tecnica sul Rischio Clinico (DM 5 marzo 2003), Roma marzo 2004

[20] Iemmi M, Mecugni D, Vezzani E, Amaducci G: “Il Primary Nursing un modello applicato, cronaca di un’esperienza di implemen-tazione in due Strutture Complesse ospedaliere” Rivista L’Infermiere 2017; 5:38-43.