Vulval lichen sclerosus: An Australasian management consensus.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Vulval lichen sclerosus (VLS) is a chronic inflammatory skin condition predominantly affecting the anogenital region in women and children. To date, there is lack of agreement amongst experts on a severity scale to aid assessment, research and treatment stratification on VLS. Furthermore, literature on best practice for long-term management of VLS is lacking. The aim of this consensus is to provide broad guidelines on the short and long-term management of VLS. METHODS: An initial focus group of Australasian experts in vulval dermatology developed a draft consensus statement for the management of VLS. Based on the results of the draft statement, a consensus panel of 22 Australasian experts, comprised of the initial and additional members, participated in an anonymous four-stage eDelphi process. Round 1 involved generation and voting on statements from the draft consensus statement developed by the focus group. In Rounds 2, 3 & 4, panel members were presented formal feedback from previous rounds and asked to indicate their level of agreement. Consensus was reached if there was ≥70% agreement on the importance of an item in the 4 (agree) to 5 (strongly agree) range. RESULTS: The expert panel, with a total of 504 collective years of experience in the field of VLS, reached consensus on a core set of 51 management statements related to diagnosis, severity, initial and long-term management, follow-up, and complications of VLS. CONCLUSIONS: This study has identified a set of management statements for VLS that may be useful in clinical practice in the Australasian population.

Do radiographers collimate? A retrospective analysis of radiographic collimation of common musculoskeletal examinations at an adult trauma centre.

INTRODUCTION: Collimation of the primary beam is an important factor in radiography to reduce dose and improve image quality. The introduction of larger detector plates in direct digital radiography (DR) allows the exposed area to be calculated by removing cropping applied to the image. The aim of this study was to assess whether the exposed area was larger than a reference standard across five different projections on different body types, with the reference size being the corresponding cassette size used in traditional film/screen or computed radiography (CR). METHOD: A retrospective clinical audit of five common musculoskeletal radiographic projections (AP knee, AP shoulder, horizontal beam lateral hip, lateral cervical spine and lateral facial bones), of 359 patients was undertaken. The electronic cropping was removed from projections, and the superior-inferior, antero-posterior and medio-lateral collimation size was measured, depending on the projection. The two measurements were multiplied to give an exposed field of view area. The three measurements were compared with a reference standard, being the size of the corresponding cassette size used in the department on film/screen or computed radiography. RESULTS: From the five projections, 1071 measurements were analysed. 416 (38.8%) of these measurements were less than or equal to the agreed reference standard. 655 (61.2%) were greater than the agreed reference standard. CONCLUSION: The study demonstrates that the majority (61.2%) of the measurements taken were above the reference standard. This results in an increase in radiation dose to patients and detrimental impacts on image quality.