Chief Medical Physicist & RSO

Michael S. Gossman, M.S, DABR, RSO

The field of medical physics includes work involving health physics, diagnostic radiology physics, nuclear medicine physics and radiation oncology physics. The essential responsibility of a medical physicist’s clinical practice in radiation oncology is to assure the safe, effective and precise delivery of radiation to achieve the therapeutic result prescribed in patient care by radiation oncologists. The chief medical physicist oversees efforts from staff medical physicists, dosimetrists, radiation therapists and other technologists, all of which comprise the Radiation Therapy Team. In this scientific field, the use of principles and accepted protocols of physics is important to assure the correct imaging, external beam delivery and placement of radioactive material during the performance of a radiation oncology procedure.

Some occupational objectives include: radioactive material handling, measurement and calibration, radioactive material placement or removal in patients, particle accelerator radiation beam output scanning and characterization, equipment quality assurance, radiation detection, acceptance testing and commissioning of radiation emitting or detecting equipment, image quality assessment and optimization of imaging systems and processes, shielding design and protection analysis, determination of dose delivered to patients and others exposed to radiation, consultation and treatment planning with radiation oncologists to determine dose to be delivered, development of institutional policies and procedures, education of radiation safety, and direct communication with state and federal regulatory bodies who govern the practice of radiation therapy.

Some additional responsibilities for quality assurance are to insure that all particle accelerators are correctly calibrated according to accepted protocols and that periodic testing of therapy equipment is maintained to certify that therapy units and planning systems are performing according to appropriate specifications. Such evaluations often lead to the initiation of further measurements and refinements for different treatment techniques, scientifically. Many of these are derived from highly specialized patient treatment plans.  It is the responsibility of the medical physicist to assure that the beam and source data are correctly entered into the treatment planning system and that the dose output from the machine is delivered accurately. Another major responsibility of the physicist is to establish a dose calculation procedure that can be used routinely throughout the department and to prove the accuracy of computer-based treatment planning.  The radiation oncology physicist is responsible for establishing treatment planning and treatment procedures.  This includes both the technical aspects of the process and the flow of procedures detailed in the process.

The radiation oncology physicist is primarily and professionally engaged in the evaluation, delivery, and optimization of radiation therapy. Their role here has administrative, clinical and educational components. For some, research may also be a component. In addition to their advanced degree, these individuals are the medical experts who apply the science of physics to medicine, specifically within their specialization. For the scientist here at Tri-State Regional Cancer Center, his specialty is in therapeutic radiologic physics. The medical physicist ensures that policies and procedures contain proper elements of good clinical practice, accurate technical delivery of treatment, radiation safety, quality control, and regulatory compliance. It is important that the medical physicist provide education, training and supervision in these areas for dosimetrists and radiation therapists. It is also important to work closely with radiation oncologists so that clinical aims as well as scientific abilities are both understood and used coherently. The supervisory physicist responsible for the entire scientific program is the chief physicist. This individual is regarded as the most qualified radiation safety expert and is often called additionally the radiation safety officer (RSO).

The American Association of Physicists in Medicine, the American College of Radiation Oncology, the American College of Radiology and other entities are working together with the United States government to provide appropriate guidance for hospitals to utilize medical physicists in the event of an incident involving radioactive material. The hospital associated medical physicist may be called on to contribute their expertise in the event of an accidental or intentional release of radioactive materials, since they are the radiological experts when it comes to radiation measurement, analysis, shielding, decontamination and containment of radioactive material.

All medical physicists have an important role in the event of any such incident. Each responds in the appropriate manner to prepare, coordinate, train and resolve such a radiological response (Link to: www.aapm.org/links/rri.asp). In the process of meeting this obligation, medical physicists are instrumental in the development of local and federal disaster plans, with special emphasis on incidents involving radioactive material. For local Boyd and Greenup County, the Chief Medical Physicist here was appointed as the radiation safety advisor/liaison to both Emergency Management Offices. He is nationally known within the medical physics community as the radiation triage expert in Eastern Kentucky.

Unlike any other scientific medical field, medical physics it is a federally regulated field. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has mandated that any radioactive material implanted in a human for the purposes of radiation therapy must involve a supervising NRC Authorized Medical Physicist, in accordance with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations. Medical physicists have minimally obtained a Master’s degree in medical physics (or directly related discipline; i.e. physics) and completed residency in a chosen specialty field for a minimum of 2 years, prior to engaging in the three stages of the board examination.

The primary qualification for the independent practice of medical physics as a “Qualified” expert, satisfying state and federal government regulation, is board certification in the appropriate scientific sub-field by one of the following entities: the American Board of Radiology, American Board of Medical Physics, American Board of Health Physics, American Board of Science in Nuclear Medicine, or the Canadian College of Physics in Medicine. This is only achievable following graduate level education and residency. Our chief medical physicist has achieved such qualification, including the state and federal registrations provided.

To contact the chief medical physicist, please click on the link below.

Chief Medical Physicist [DABR]
– Michael S. Gossman, M.S, DABR, RSO

• American Board of Radiology
  Diplomate in Therapeutic Radiologic Physics

• State of Kentucky / State of Indiana / State of Tennessee
  Qualified Expert Medical Physicist & Radiation Safety Officer

• U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
  Authorized Medical Physicist & Radiation Safety Officer

Books

1. Pawlicki T, Dunscombe P, Mundt AJ and Scalliet P. Quality And Safety In Radiotherapy. Editors: Sibata CH & Gossman MS, Chapter 19. Taylor & Francis Group Ltd., 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxford OX14 4RN, UK (2010).

2. Gossman MS, Calibration Methodology And Multiple Tip Structure By Scanning Tunneling Microscopy. UMI Company, 789 East Eisenhower Parkway, Ann Arbor, MI 48106 (1997).

Compendia, Monographs & Reports

1. Thomadsen BR, Biggs PJ, DeWard LA, Coffey CW, Tsao SC, Gossman MS, et al. Report Of AAPM Task Group 152: Model Regulations For Electronic Brachytherapy. American Association Of Physicists In Medicine. College Park, MD (2009).

2. Gossman MS & Felinski-Semler BF, Chapter 8.13. Controversies In Medical Physics: A Compendium Of Point/Counterpoint Debates. Editors: Hendee WR and Orton CG. American Association of Physicists in Medicine. One Physics Ellipse, College Park, MD 20740 (2008).

3. Gossman MS & Halvorsen PH, Chapter 10.13. Controversies In Medical Physics: A Compendium Of Point/Counterpoint Debates. Editors: Hendee WR and Orton CG. American Association of Physicists in Medicine. One Physics Ellipse, College Park, MD 20740 (2008).

Journal Articles

1. Gossman MS, Zhao L, Cao M, Lopez JP and Das IJ. Dosimetric Impact Of Surgical Clips In Electron Beam Treatment Of Breast Cancer. Medical Dosimetry Journal. (Awaiting Publication 2010).

2. Gossman MS, Graves-Calhoun AR and Wilkinson JD. Establishing Radiation Therapy Treatment Planning Effects Involving Implantable Pacemakers And Implantable Cardioverter-defibrillators. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics. (Awaiting Publication 2010).

3. Gossman MS and Burgess LA. Point/Counterpoint: Medical Physicists Should Be Allowed By States To Image And Treat, Just Like Radiologic Technologists. Medical Physics Journal. (Awaiting Publication 2010).

4. Gossman MS, Seuntjens JP, Christian KJ, Serban MF, Lawson RC, Robertson MA, Lopez JP and Justice TE. Dosimetric Effects Near Implanted Vascular Access Ports: An Examination of External Photon Beam Dose Calculations. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics. 2009; 10(3): 3-15.

5. Gossman MS and Halvorsen PH. Point/Counterpoint: As Currently Practiced, Many Medical Physics Peer Reviews Are A Sham Because The AAPM Has Failed To Be Proactive In The Development Of Appropriate Guidelines. Medical Physics. 2007; 34 (10): 3701-3704.

6. Gossman MS, Robertson MA and Lawson RC. Correlation Between Detector Array Measurements And A Computer Algorithm For Enhanced Dynamic Wedge Profiles. Medical Dosimetry. Fall 2007; 32(3): 211-215.

7. Gossman MS. Classnotes. UofL Magazine. Winter 2005; 24(1): 40.

8. Sharma SC, Johnson MW and Gossman MS. Practical Considerations For Small Field Size Electron Beam Dosimetry. Medical Dosimetry. Summer 2005; 30(2): 104-106.

9. Gossman MS and Felinski-Semler BF. Point/Counterpoint: NRC Regulations On Shipping Radioactive Material Should Be More Explicit Than Just Stating Activity. Medical Physics. January 2005; 32(1): 1-4.

10. Gossman MS and Sharma SC. Total Skin High-Dose-Rate Electron Therapy Dosimetry Using TG-51. Medical Dosimetry. Winter 2004; 29(4): 285-287.

11. Ouseph PJ and Gossman MS. Effects Of Self-modifying Multiple-tips On STM Surface Pictures, Measurement Science and Technology. April 1998; 9(4): 701-704.

12. Gossman MS., Calibration Methodology And Multiple Tip Structure By Scanning Tunneling Microscopy, M.A. International. February 1998; Pub. No. 1387081, 36 (01): 202.

Colloquia

1. Grant No. 1106: Establishing The Functional Stability Of Medtronic Defibrillators And Pacemakers As Well As Local Radiation Oncology Dosimetry Concerns When High Energy Particle Accelerator Beams Are Directed Through Such Devices. Medtronic, Inc., External Research Program, Mounds View, MN, August 2009.

2. Medical Physics Using Radioactive Material, Tri-State Regional Cancer Center, C/O Holy Family Christian School, Ashland, KY, March 2007.

3. Thomson-Nielson MOSFET Users Meeting – Selected Speaker, American Association of Physicists in Medicine, Seattle, WA, August 2005.

4. Principles Of Medical Physics And Special Procedures, University of Tennessee at Chattanooga, Physics Department, Chattanooga, TN, March 2005.

5. Advances In Imaging Again Mean Advances In Treatment, Tennessee Society of Radiologic Technology (TSRT), Erlanger Medical Center, Chattanooga, TN, November 2004.

6. Breast Cancer Treatment, Parkview Hospital, Radiation Oncology, Fort Wayne, IN, February 2003.

7. Radiation Oncology Physics, Indiana University Southeast, Physics Department, New Albany, IN, September 2002.

8. The Physics of Radiation Therapy, Parkview Hospital, Biomedical Engineering Department, Fort Wayne, IN, September 2002.

9. Radiation Safety Seminar: 5-day lecture, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Department of Institutional Safety, Nashville, TN, June 1998.

10. Radiation Safety Seminar: 5-day lecture, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Department of Institutional Safety, Nashville, TN, January 1998.

11. Calibration Methodology And Multiple Tip Structure By Scanning Tunneling Microscopy, University of Louisville, Physics Department, Louisville, KY, June 1997.

12. Scanning Tunneling Microscopy, University of Louisville, Physics Department –  National Physics Honor Society, Louisville, KY, January 1997.

13. Physics As A Career And Special Topic: Scanning Tunneling Microscopy, Jeffersonville H.S., Science Department, Jeffersonville, IN, December 1996.

Conference Proffered Poster Presentations

1. Gossman MS, Zhao L, Cao M, Lopez JP and Das IJ. Dose Delivery Effects In Electron Beams From Surgical Breast Clips. American Association of Physicists in Medicine, Anaheim, CA, 2009.

2. Berg RE, Gossman MS and Klash SJ. Surface Dose Prediction And Verification For IMRT Plans Using Line Dose Profiles. American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology, Atlanta, GA, 2004.

1. Gossman MS. Issuance: Grant No. 1106: Establishing The Functional Stability Of Medtronic Defibrillators And Pacemakers As Well As Local Radiation Oncology Dosimetry Concerns When High Energy Particle Accelerator Beams Are Directed Through Such Devices. Medtronic, Inc., External Research Program, 8200 Coral Sea Ave MVN41, Mounds View, MN 55112. Awarded October 2008. Completed & closed 2009.
    

2. Gossman MS. Issuance: Grant No. 7019: Dosimetric Changes Identified For Various Bard Ports On External Beam Radiation Therapy Plans At 6 MV And 18 MV X-ray Energies. Bard Access Systems, Inc., 605 North 5600 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116. Awarded September 2007. Completed & closed 2008.