CIRSE: The University Hospital of Strasbourg was an early adopter of IASIOS – what was your motivation for joining?
Gangi: We were the second hospital in the world to receive IASIOS accreditation. For us, it was crucial to take a step back and assess how we were working. It’s easy to feel confident that everything is running smoothly. Still, when an external organization steps in to perform a thorough quality control, you often discover areas where you can improve. That’s precisely what IASIOS did for us. Going through every aspect of our processes highlighted areas we could refine, ultimately helping us enhance the quality of care we provide to our patients.
CIRSE: In your opinion, which IASIOS criteria are the most important for patient care?
Gangi: Naturally, all the core criteria required for accreditation, along with the extended criteria for achieving Centre of Excellence status, are significant and closely connected. However, one criterion that significantly impacted our workflow was point 3 of section 1 of the CIRSE Standards of Quality Assurance in Interventional Oncology, which addresses the management of patient records and clinical data. Becoming more systematic in collecting and managing medical history for IO procedures has elevated the clinical role of interventional oncologists. These records are now stored in an organized, consistent manner, allowing anaesthesiologists and other clinicians to easily access the information they need to ensure patient safety. This process standardizes the patient pathway, making it more reproducible and much safer overall.
Kuber: Two critical IASIOS criteria that stand out for enhancing patient care are points 10d and 7d. Starting with 10d, which asks whether we get patient feedback on our interventional oncology procedures, has been crucial for us. It prompted us to establish regular service assessments through a patient satisfaction survey that we conduct every two years. These surveys allow us to identify specific areas for improvement and, more importantly, implement and track actions based on the feedback. This helps improve our services and provides a structured way to share what we have learned and improvements with other imaging professionals.
On the other hand, 7d focuses on peer-to-peer discussions regarding patient treatment plans. Our weekly case review meetings play a critical role here. These sessions involve all professionals—doctors, anaesthetists, nurses, assistants, and even administrative staff like secretaries. We’ve implemented tools like the follow-up/programming sheet to streamline and secure the entire treatment process. These discussions and tools are essential for ensuring that every team member is aligned, ultimately leading to safer, more efficient, and better-organized patient care.
CIRSE: How has becoming an IASIOS centre benefited your team?
Cazzato: Before receiving the IASIOS seal, our team was structured to check the quality of clinical services we provided constantly. Nevertheless, the approach we had was not systematic and relied on some sporadic initiatives such as morbidity and mortality meetings. Adopting the IASIOS criteria pushed us to revise and increase the number of quality assessments that are useful for evaluating our performance.
Kuber: Becoming an IASIOS centre has encouraged us to constantly evaluate and refine our practices, making us more efficient as an organization and adaptable to new challenges. For instance, we’ve conducted waste audits that have helped us reduce the amount of incinerated waste, which has lowered costs. Regular audits have been invaluable in terms of quality and safety of care. Our team’s visibility has also increased through participation in conferences and publications. Both medical and paramedical communication are actively encouraged at regional, national, and international levels. This enhanced visibility has made it easier for us to recruit staff, even in today’s challenging HR environment. We are seen as a very attractive workplace, which has been a huge advantage.
CIRSE: Looking back, what was your most significant take away from the accreditation process?
Kuber: Accreditation is important, because it recognizes everyone’s hard work, and that recognition is gratifying for the whole team. One of the key takeaways is how much easier it has made other regulatory processes, such as the HAS certification which hospitals go through every four years. The various criteria set by IASIOS have helped us meet those requirements without difficulty. Additionally, IASIOS has made all our improvement efforts more visible, which is crucial for professionals, as it highlights the value of even small changes—like installing a black-out film on windows to hallways to protect patient privacy and dignity. However, the most important outcome has been how the process has helped our team grow professionally. It’s a safe, stimulating approach that engages everyone daily and continually enhances their skills.
Kopp: The achievement of this accreditation is, above all, the result of teamwork, reflecting the daily commitment of each team member to provide high-quality care to all our patients. This process allows us not only to identify areas for improvement, as with any quality initiative, but also to highlight the many strengths already present within the service. Quality is at the heart of every step in patient care, and this recognition is a well-deserved reward for all our teams.
Cazzato: The most important thing I’ve learned is that providing quality healthcare services requires adopting continuous virtuous habits. I also enjoyed the team spirit in the preparatory phase. Seeing all the different members of the IR team and hospital administration cooperate to achieve a great goal was incredible! Everyone knew they were cooperating to accomplish a significant result with a subsequent substantial clinical impact. The feeling of a team working hard together to reach a goal is always a great experience.
CIRSE: As the world’s first IASIOS Centre of Excellence, do you have any advice for centres considering joining IASIOS?
Kopp: My advice would be not to see accreditation as a goal in itself, but rather to aim for continuous improvement in patient care. With this perspective, IASIOS becomes a support tool rather than a constraint. It is essential to first adopt a genuine quality approach, as the IASIOS criteria will naturally align with it. Another piece of advice would be to involve the entire team: the success of IASIOS relies on strong collaboration. In Strasbourg, this was our true strength, thanks to the trust and commitment of Prof. Gangi, Dr. Cazzato, and Cathy Kuber, who managed to create a positive quality-driven dynamic.
Cazzato: It may seem stressful and challenging to begin working towards IASIOS accreditation; many team members have put in a lot of extra effort, but setting high-level clinical standards thanks to the IASIOS process will pay off.
Gangi: I understand that some people may think they don’t need quality control or find it boring, and it can be a challenge to motivate a team to start the process. However, once you begin the accreditation journey, the momentum builds. In particular, nurses and technicians often become more motivated, because they see the positive impact it has on their work and feel reassured that they’re doing things in the best possible way. So, my key advice is just to start. Once you get going, more and more people will become interested and engaged, and before you know it, you’ll not only meeting the core requirements, but strive to exceed them. It becomes a natural progression towards becoming a Centre of Excellence
