Stockholm, Sweden

ESTRO 2026

Session

Monday
May 18
08:45 - 10:00
A7
This house believes it is time for APARA: Treatments should only be "As Precise As Reasonably Achievable"
Marcel van Herk, United Kingdom;
Tomas Janssen, The Netherlands
It has been, for many years, the aim of many medical physicists in our field to ensure precision of our treatments. Delineation, treatment planning, image guidance, machine QA, plan QA all seem to aim for the highest precision achievable. Indeed, in recent years, the precision of our treatments has become excellent. However, still, a lot of effort is spent improving or maintaining this precision. Simultaneously, healthcare costs are rising, our workforce is under pressure and we can only spent our time once. Is it still worthwhile to spent resources in trying to improve the precision of our treatments, or have we reached a plateau where ‘good’ is actually ‘good enough’? Should we continue to pursue the highest precision, or is it enough to be “as precise as reasonably achievable”?
Debate
Physics
08:45 - 08:48
Introduction & voting
08:48 - 09:03
For the motion - High precision is not reasonably achievable in today’s workforce landscape for all patients
Steven Petit, The Netherlands
09:03 - 09:18
Against the motion rebuttal - Every patient deserves the most precise treatment plan
Laura Patricia Kaplan, Denmark
09:18 - 09:33
For the motion rebuttal - What matters are results: High precision contouring does not change treatment outcome
Mauricio Reyes, Switzerland
09:33 - 09:48
Against the motion - Errors add up: Precision is a physicist's responsibility
Victor Hernandez, Spain
09:48 - 10:00
Discussion & voting