Radiotherapy departments are having to work more efficiently to cope with increasing demand for radiotherapy resources. Radiotherapy treatment room efficiency may be increased by the introduction of hospital clothing as this negates the need for patient changing in the treatment room. However, studies have shown that hospital clothing can have a negative effect on patient dignity. It is therefore important to balance potential time saving with any detriment to patients.

This study examined the effect that hospital clothing had on the time patients spend in the treatment room and aimed to identify patients’ opinions of the clothing.

Potential time saving was determined by covertly timing patients currently undergoing radiotherapy treatment as they entered and exited the treatment room. A total of 348 patients were timed in their own clothing and 341 were timed when they wore hospital clothing. The timings of these two groups were compared to determine whether hospital clothing saved treatment unit time. Patient opinions of the clothing were examined by issuing a short questionnaire, designed to gather ordinal data, at the end of their course of treatment. Questionnaires were issued only to patients who had worn hospital clothing in the radiotherapy department.

Introducing hospital clothing saved a significant amount of treatment room time and patients were generally positive about wearing the clothing.

It is suggested that hospital clothing is a welcome addition to the radiotherapy department to increase efficiency without detriment to patients.

Meta-analyses demonstrate single-fraction radiotherapy to be as effective as multi-fraction treatment in palliating painful bone metastases, although surveys suggest reluctance in prescribing single fractions.

Assess the factors influencing the choice of dose-fractionation regimen in an unselected population; examine retreatment rates and subsequent skeletal events.

Data were extracted from case notes for 120 patients treated in 2000 and 2006 in a single centre serving a defined population; analysis used χ2 and Fisher's exact statistical tests.

An 8 Gy fraction was the commonest regimen prescribed (single-fraction delivery rate 53·6%). Tumour site was a significant factor in choice of dose-fractionation schedule. Patients with metastatic breast carcinoma were significantly less likely to receive single-fraction treatment compared with those with metastatic lung carcinoma (year 2000: p = 0·038, 2006: p = 0·001). There was a significantly higher retreatment rate following single-fraction compared with multi-fraction treatment (11% versus 3%). There were two subsequent neural axis compressions and four pathological fractures.

Single-fraction treatment is the commonest regimen but multiple fractions are still frequently delivered. Better prognosis groups appear more likely to receive multi-fraction treatment, possibly to avoid the need for retreatment. Subsequent skeletal events are rare but carry high morbidity when they occur.

To record the characteristics, management and functional outcome of a group of patients with IMSCC, who were treated with radiotherapy in our institution, and compare these parameters with similar data on MSCC patients.

Data (gender, age, primary oncological diagnosis, pain, performance status and neurological status) were prospectively collected for 28 patients. Patients were then followed up post treatment to document their response to treatment and treatment-related toxicity.

The median survival of our group of IMSCC patients is similar to that of an MSCC patient. In addition, the IMSCC group exhibits significant clinical symptoms including neurological deficit.

Although further studies are necessary, we have found that IMSCC patients in this study share similar prognosis and clinical symptoms with MSCC patients. Clinicians should be aware of this when communicating with IMSCC patients and their families, and short-course radiotherapy should be considered.

To assess the reliability of post-implant CT (PICT) dosimetry for I-125 prostate seed brachytherapy by investigating the variation between centres in performing PICT through a multi-centre audit.

Computerised tomography data sets from four I-125 prostate brachytherapy patients were circulated to nine participating centres. Centres followed local protocol for PICT outlining and seed identification, dosimetry for D90, V100 and V150 for the prostate was reported. Outlines were compared to determine the variation in: quality parameters (D90, V100 and V150), dose-volume histograms and approach to PICT dosimetry between the centres.

There was significant variation in the prostate outlines drawn by the nine centres; for a prostate with mean volume 43 cm3, the range was 39–57 cm3 which led to variations of D90 of 119–154 Gy (mean 140 Gy) and V100 of 80–93% (mean of 88%). Using automatic seedfinder software reduced discrepancies between centres identifying seeds; overall consistency in seed location was good.

There was a significant uncertainty in the outlining of the prostate volume for PICT dosimetry with an uncertainty value of around ± 20 Gy on D90. PICT is a valuable technique but its accuracy and consistency limitations must be appreciated.

Prostate implants at the British Columbia Cancer Agency are performed using a pre-planned technique. Physicians can augment the dose distribution using one to five non-planned ‘extra’ seeds and this option is determined without intraoperative feedback. The purpose of this research is to quantify the dosimetric impact of extra seeds and to assess the circumstances under which they are considered necessary.

Implanting physicians used a questionnaire to record the three-dimensional location and their rationale for using extra seeds. A plan reconstruction algorithm was used to distinguish the extra seeds from the planned seeds. Distributions with and without extra seeds were calculated to quantify the dosimetric impact to the prostate, urethra and rectum.

Extra seeds resulted in mean relative increases to V100, V150 and V200 of 3·7%, 13% and 19·1%, respectively. Mean prostate D90 increased from 147 to 156 Gy. Improvements in post-implant quality assurance codes were recorded in 30% of the implants with minimal dose increase to the rectum and urethra. Extra seeds were mainly deposited in the prostate anterior–superior quadrant.

The use of two to five extra seeds can result in improvements to pre-planned prostate implants, whereas the costs in terms of increased rectal and prostatic urethral dose are relatively minor.

This study was designed to study the variations in different geometrical and dosimetric parameters.

In this study, two groups comprises 21 and 28 patients, who were treated with 9·5 Gy × 2 Fx and 7·5 Gy × 3 Fx, respectively, using microselectron high-dose rate (HDR) remote control unit. All patients were analysed using orthogonal radiographs to evaluate variations in different parameters.

Variations in different parameters are more in Group II patients than in Group I patients, which show that the variation in geometrical and dosimetrical parameters increases with increasing HDR number of fractions.

In the reporting of an outcome of multiple fractionation of HDR treatments resultant dosimetric parameters must be evaluated and must be used for clinical interpretation.

To investigate whether inadequate dose to Point-A necessitates treatment plan changes in a time of computed tomography (CT)-image-guided brachytherapy treatment planning for cervix cancer.

A total of 125 tandem and ovoid insertions from 25 cervix patients treated were reviewed. CT-image-based treatment planning was carried out for each insertion. Point-A is identified and the dose documented; however, dose optimisation in each plan was based on covering target while limiting critical organ doses (PlanTarget). No attempts were made to equate prescription and Point-A dose. For each insertion, a second hypothetical treatment plan was generated by prescribing dose to Point-A (PlanPoint-A). Plans were inter-compared using dose–volume histogram analyses.

A total of 250 treatment plans were analysed. For the study population, the median cumulative dose at Point-A was 80 Gy (range 70–95) for PlanTarget compared with 84·25 Gy for PlanPoint-A. Bladder and rectal doses were higher for PlanPoint-A compared with PlanTarget (p < 0·0001). Target D90 did not correlate with Point-A dose (p = 0·60).

Depending on applicator geometry, tumour size and patient anatomy, Point-A dose may vary in magnitude compared with prescription dose. Treatment plan modifications purely based on inadequate Point-A dose are unnecessary, as these may result in higher organ-at-risk doses and not necessarily improve target coverage.

With recent technological advances in image-guided radiation therapy (IGRT), through cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT), more image-related clinical information is being collected, at more frequent intervals throughout the treatment course. As radiation therapy (RT) programmes further develop IGRT technology, the aim of this study is to assess whether the distribution and communication of professional responsibilities is evolving to ensure appropriate use of the technology.

Radiation therapists practicing at any of the 14 Ontario RT centres were sent an electronic survey (n = 400). Closed-ended quantitative items addressed perceptions regarding policies, comfort, and professional responsibility in addressing CBCT concerns. Focus was on gynaecological, lung, head and neck (H&N) disease sites. Options for qualitative comments and explanations were included where appropriate.

Seventy-nine surveys were submitted. Respondents from 12/14 (85·7%) centres used CBCT for at least one of three disease sites, most commonly on a daily basis. Five of these centres (41·7%) did not require radiation oncologist CBCT review, with others requiring it Day 1 or weekly. Potential CBCT observations of concern were grouped as set-up issues, tumour changes, organ-at-risk (OAR) changes, contour changes and ancillary findings (especially lung and airway changes). Respondents believed they consulted another professional about a CBCT in 20·2% of H&N patients, 19·6% of lung patients and 9·7% of gynaecological patients. The level of comfort in doing so varied from 77·0% for H&N to 89·5% for lung. Respondents were most likely to believe themselves responsible for changes in OARs (92·2% believing themselves responsible), and least likely for ancillary findings (62·7%).

Through preliminary insight from Ontario therapists, a degree of inconsistency is apparent between perceptions, practices and assigned roles in the management of CBCT information. Clear definition of the scope and nature of therapists’ responsibility for interpreting and addressing changes on CBCT images should be developed within each centre.