Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Cancer stage is important to capture within population-based cancer registries (PBCRs) to facilitate recruitment to clinical trials, evaluate prevention programs, assess treatment impact, and forecast cancer service needs. However, capture of cancer stage at diagnosis in many PBCRs is low, stemming from missing data in cancer registrations from health services. This study aims to identify the barriers and facilitators faced by Health Information Managers (HIM)/Clinical Coders (CC) and key multidisciplinary team meeting (MDM) personnel when capturing cancer stage at diagnosis. Method A cross-sectional online survey was conducted with 167 HIM/CC and 58 key MDM personnel employed within Victorian hospitals. The survey included 8 descriptor questions, 12–14 5-point Likert questions and 2–3 free text questions. Free text questions were analysed using the Theoretical Domains Framework, while all other questions were analysed using descriptive statistics, Spearman rank or Kruskall-Wallis tests. Results For HIM/CC, barriers related to the theoretical domains of (i) environmental context and resources, with 87% of participants agreeing required information was not readily available, (ii) knowledge, with 46% of participants agreeing they worry about incorrectly coding stage and (iii) skills, with 42% of participants agreeing they were not confident and 37% feeling they had inadequate training. For key MDM personnel, barriers related to the theoretical domains of (i) environmental context and resources, with 50% of participants agreeing there were time constraints, and required information was not readily available (ii) goals, with 36% of participants agreeing capturing cancer stage is not a priority, and (iii) social/professional role and identity, with 36% of participants agreeing it was not their role to discuss and capture stage. Despite the barriers, over half of participants in both groups agreed recording stage at diagnosis was a vital task. Conclusions Resolving the barriers identified will require enhancing documentation available to, and the training received by, HIM/CC and encouraging MDM Chairs to ensure cancer stage is discussed and recorded adequately for all patients presented.

Background To compare 3 Dimensional Conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) with Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy (IMRT) with Volumetric-Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) for bladder cancer. Methods Radiotherapy plans for 15 patients with T2-T4N0M0 bladder cancer were prospectively developed for 3-DCRT, IMRT and VMAT using Varian Eclipse planning system. The same radiation therapist carried out all planning and the same clinical dosimetric constraints were used. 10 of the patients with well localised tumours had a simultaneous infield boost (SIB) of the primary tumour planned for both IMRT and VMAT. Tumour control probabilities and normal tissue complication probabilities were calculated. Results Mean planning time for 3D-CRT, IMRT and VMAT was 30.0, 49.3, and 141.0 minutes respectively. The mean PTV conformity (CI) index for 3D-CRT was 1.32, for IMRT 1.05, and for VMAT 1.05. The PTV Homogeneity (HI) index was 0.080 for 3D-CRT, 0.073 for IMRT and 0.086 for VMAT. Tumour control and normal tissue complication probabilities were similar for 3D-CRT, IMRT and VMAT. The mean monitor units were 267 (range 250–293) for 3D-CRT; 824 (range 641–1083) for IMRT; and 403 (range 333–489) for VMAT (P < 0.05). Average treatment delivery time were 2:25min (range 2:01–3:09) for 3D-CRT; 4:39 (range 3:41–6:40) for IMRT; and 1:14 (range 1:13–1:14) for VMAT. In selected patients, the SIB did not result in a higher dose to small bowel or rectum. Conclusions VMAT is associated with similar dosimetric advantages as IMRT over 3D-CRT for muscle invasive bladder cancer. VMAT is associated with faster delivery times and less number of mean monitor units than IMRT. SIB is feasible in selected patients with localized tumours.

Reports on a study of the bacteriological and mycological quality of 87 prepared salads purchased from delicatessens. Bacterial counts were generally low. Of the 87 salads, only 19 per cent had plate counts greater than 104 organisms g. Coliforms were isolated from three samples, E. coli from one and Listeria monocytogenes from one. By contrast yeasts were isolated from 76 per cent of the salads and at counts greater than 104 organisms g in 31 per cent. Twenty-one different yeast species were isolated, of which the commonest were Saccharomyces dairensis and Saccharomyces exiguus. Few of the yeasts have any significant role in human disease. The commonest yeasts isolated, however, are associated with spoilage of mayonnaise-based salads. Their isolation from these foods suggests inadequate temperature control.

Reports on a study of the bacteriological and mycological quality of 87 prepared salads purchased from delicatessens. Bacterial counts were generally low. Of the 87 salads, only 19 per cent had plate counts greater than 104 organismsg. Coliforms were isolated from three samples, E. coli from one and Listeria monocytogenes from one. By contrast yeasts were isolated from 76 per cent of the salads and at counts greater than 104 organismsg in 31 per cent. Twentyone different yeast species were isolated, of which the commonest were Saccharomyces dairensis and Saccharomyces exiguus. Few of the yeasts have any significant role in human disease. The commonest yeasts isolated, however, are associated with spoilage of mayonnaisebased salads. Their isolation from these foods suggests inadequate temperature control.