A comparative study of application of domestic and imported accelerators in primary hospitals

Objective To investigate the application of accelerators in primary hospitals, and to explore the advantages and disadvantages of domestic accelerators. Methods Twenty-six primary hospitals that used domestic accelerators and an equal number of primary hospitals that used imported accelerators were enrolled in the study. Comparison was made by group t test. Results (1) The mean numbers of patients treated every day were 28.08 for the 26 hospitals with imported accelerators and 39.23 for the 26 hospitals with domestic accelerators (P=0.45). (2) There was no significant relationship of hospital level with equipment brand, the number of treated patients, or treatment technology.(3) The proportions of hospitals that need to employ radiotherapy doctors, physical therapists, and technicians were 87.8%, 77.6%, and 87.8%, respectively.(4) The purchasing and maintenance costs were significantly higher for the imported accelerators than for the domestic ones (P=0.00, 0.04); there were no significant differences in product service, applicability, convenience, or stability between imported and domestic accelerators (P=0.21-1.00, 0.15-0.52, 0.07-1.00). (5) For the domestic accelerators, the repeatability was poor in the low-dose treatment, and the remote diagnosis of equipment failure was not yet achieved. Conclusions Domestic accelerators can meet the basic requirements of primary hospitals. Compared with imported ones, domestic accelerators have lower total costs but comparable indices in most investigations and tests. In terms of repeatability of the low-dose treatment, remote diagnosis, and planning system, however, domestic accelerators still have a long way to go. Key words: Accelerator, domestic; Accelerator, import; Radiotherapy; Primary hospital