The Royal College of Radiologists National Vulvar Cancer Audit.

AIMS: This audit examined UK vulvar cancer practice from March 2018 to January 2019 and compared it to standards from national and international recommendations. Follow-up data collection in 2020 examined patient outcomes and toxicity. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Audit standards were based on Royal College of Radiologists (RCR) guidance and published literature. A web-based questionnaire was sent to the audit leads at all cancer centres in the UK. Prospective data collection included patient demographics, tumour characteristics, radiotherapy indications, dosimetry, timelines, and follow-up data. The audit targets were 95% compliance with the RCR dose/fractionation schemes in definitive and adjuvant patients, 40% use of intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), 100% of radical patients treated as category 1, and 95% use of gap compensation for category 1 patients. RESULTS: 34/54 UK radiotherapy centres (63%) completed data entry for 152 patients. 23 out of 34 (68%) centres submitted follow-up data for 94 patients. One indicator exceeded the audit target: 98% of radical patients received IMRT. The indicators of RCR dose/fractionation compliance for adjuvant/definitive radiotherapy were achieved by 80%/43% for the primary, 80%/86% for elective lymph nodes, and 21%/21% for pathological lymph nodes. The use of concomitant chemotherapy with radical radiotherapy in suitable patients was achieved by 71%. Other indicators demonstrated that 78% were treated as category 1 and 27% used gap compensation. Acute toxicity was mostly related to skin, gastrointestinal, and genitourinary sites. Grade 3 and Grade 4 toxicities were seen at acceptable rates within the radical and adjuvant groups. Late toxicity was mostly grade 0. CONCLUSION: This audit provides a comprehensive picture of UK practice. IMRT is widely used in the UK, and treatment-related toxicity is moderate. The dose fractionation was very heterogeneous. The designation of vulvar cancer as category 1 was not regularly followed for radical/adjuvant patients, and there was minimal gap compensation during treatment.

Service Improvements and Workload Increases: Royal College of Radiologists (RCR) Re-Audit of Curative Intent Radiotherapy for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC).

AIMS: The Royal College of Radiologists (RCR) audit of radical radiotherapy (RR) for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in 2013 concluded that there was under-treatment compared to international comparators and marked variability between cancer networks. Elderly patients were less likely to receive guideline recommended treatments. Access to technological developments was low. Various national and local interventions have since taken place. This study aims to re-assess national practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Radiotherapy departments completed one questionnaire for each patient started on RR for 4 weeks in January 2023. RESULTS: Ninety-three percent of centres returned data on 295 patients. RR has increased 70% since 2013 but patients on average wait 20% longer to start treatment (p = 0.02). Staging investigations were often outside a desirable timeframe (79% of PET/CT scans). Advanced planning techniques are used more frequently: 4-dimensional planning increased from 33% to 90% (P < 0.001), cone beam imaging from 67% to 97% (p < 0.001) and colleague led peer review increased from 41% to 73% (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: There have been significant improvements in care. There has been a considerable increase in clinical oncology workload with evidence of stress on the system that requires additional resourcing.

National Survey of Current Follow-up Protocols for Patients Treated for Endometrial Cancer in the UK.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to establish a baseline of national practice for follow-up after treatment for endometrial cancer in the UK. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An online cross-sectional survey was developed and distributed through the Royal College of Radiologists via an email link to the audit leads of radiotherapy centres in the UK. The survey was conducted from November 2021 to 5 January 2022. The main themes assessed in the survey were the form, frequency and duration of follow-up practices. RESULTS: There were a total of 43/61 (70%) complete responses. 93% of centres had a standard follow-up protocol and 7% who did not have a follow-up protocol discharged patients after the post-operative review. Five centres (13%) used molecular profiling to inform follow-up practices. Patient-initiated follow-up was mainly used in the cohort of patients who had surgery alone with no adjuvant treatment (68%, (19/28)). In the cohort who had face-to-face follow-up, the majority had pelvic examinations as part of their review and total follow-up for five years. 93% of respondents are interested in a national follow-up protocol. CONCLUSION: Our data shows that there is national variation in practise with regard to follow-up of women treated for endometrial cancer. Many of the follow-up practises are based on conventional follow-up regimens and these may fail to address the more holistic needs of cancer survivors. Recent publication of updated guidance from the British Gynaecological Cancer Society may help standardise practise and provide a more relevant approach to follow-up for women treated for endometrial cancer.

Radiology reporting of incidental osteoporotic vertebral fragility fractures present on CT studies: results of UK national re-audit.

AIM: To describe a UK-wide re-audit of the 2019 Royal College of Radiologists (RCR) audit evaluating patient-related data and organisational infrastructure in the radiological reporting of vertebral fragility fractures (VFFs) on computed tomography (CT) studies and to assess the impact of a series of RCR interventions, initiated to raise VFF awareness, on reporting practice and outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patient specific and organisational questionnaires largely replicated those utilised in 2019. The patient questionnaire involved retrospective analysis of between 50 and 100 consecutive, non-traumatic CT studies which included the thoracolumbar spine. All RCR radiology audit leads were invited to participate. Data collection commenced from 1 April 2022. RESULTS: Data were supplied by 129/194 (67%) departments. One thousand five hundred and eighty-six of 7,316 patients (21.7%) had a VFF on auditor review. Overall improvements were demonstrated in key initial/provisional reporting results; comment on spine/bone (93.2%, 14.4% improvement, p<0.0002); fracture severity assessment (34.7%, 8.5% improvement, p=0.0007); use of recommended terminology (67.8%, 7.5% improvement, p=0.0034); recommendations for further management (11.7%, 9.1% improvement, p<0.0002). CONCLUSIONS: The 2022 national re-audit confirms improvements in diagnostic performance and practice in VFF reporting. Continuing work is required to build on this improvement and to further embed best practice.

Preventing post-contrast acute kidney injury and hypersensitivity reactions: UK national audit.

AIM: To audit UK radiology departmental protocols related to the prevention of Iodine-based contrast media (ICM) adverse drug reactions (ADRs) and to assess their compliance with the Royal College of Radiologists (RCR) endorsed Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists' 2018 Iodinated Contrast Guidelines. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Questionnaires were sent to all UK acute National Health Service (NHS) providers treating adult patients with an audit lead registered with the RCR (162 providers encompassing 211 hospital radiology departments). The questionnaire included three main sections: renal function screening, renal protection regimens, and hypersensitivity reactions prevention and follow-up. Data collection was conducted between April and July 2022. RESULTS: Sixty-one per cent (129/211) of departments responded, representing 67% of eligible providers. An independent imaging services provider supplied one additional set of data (n=130 overall). Of the responding departments, for post-contrast acute kidney injury (PC-AKI), 41% and 56% had the recommended risk assessment for inpatients and outpatients, respectively. Renal function testing was often over-utilised, and their results were applied improperly. Sixty-eight per cent of departments used the advised threshold for considering renal protection. For hypersensitivity reactions, 9% of departments had the correct risk assessment. Thirty-six per cent of departments had the correct risk mitigation protocol for identified high-risk patients. The documentation and follow-up for hypersensitivity reactions were similarly inadequate. CONCLUSION: Local protocols on preventing ICM ADRs were largely non-compliant with RCR guidelines. Departments need to update their protocols in line with current evidence to avoid iatrogenic morbidity or unnecessary tests and over-precaution.

Assessment of the Implementation of Lung Cancer Consensus Statements From the Royal College of Radiologists in 2021; Progress and Barriers.

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer outcomes in the UK are worse than those in many similar countries. The RCR developed a series of 43 consensus statements (CS) to facilitate improvements in care for patients treated with radiotherapy. METHODS: We asked all 61 UK radiotherapy centres to self-assess the implementation of the CS and to describe their departmental key strengths and weaknesses in September 2021. RESULTS: 87% of centres returned their assessments. Whilst developmental activity was seen in most areas for most centres, 24 of the statements were felt to be difficult to implement within the next 2 years by at least one centre. The most frequently reported strengths were in the implementation of SABR (stereotactic body radiotherapy), concurrent chemoradiation for non-small cell lung cancer and technological aspects of treatment planning. The most frequently described departmental weaknesses were in pre-habilitation, timeliness of PET/CT scans and prophylaxis for Pneumocystis jiroveci Pneumonia (PJP). Barriers to implementation were often due to insufficient resource, a requirement for organisations to work together, and a perceived lack of evidence base. Strengths were often attributed to good team working, a local champion and being an early adopter. CONCLUSIONS: This work confirms the commitment of lung cancer radiotherapy teams across the UK to improve outcomes for their patients. Most of the statements have been implemented at least partially. Themes have been identified to aid further progress, one of which is a requirement for significant investment.

National audit of seven-day working care in radiology.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the extent to which our current provision of diagnostic and interventional radiology services matches existing clinical demand and future government proposals as set out in the Royal College of Radiologists published guidance on providing seven-day acute care. METHODS: In June 2018, all UK radiology department audit leads were sent a questionnaire designed to assess compliance for each standard of the Royal College of Radiologists published guidance on providing seven-day acute care. RESULTS: 135 hospitals (68%) responded. Of those that responded, 96% of departments have a diagnostic radiologist rota for clinicians to discuss acute cases and review imaging and 48% of departments do not have a fully staffed consultant rota 24 h a day, seven days a week for interventional radiology. There is significant variance in MRI radiographer availability within departments, ranging from 18.8% during Saturday/Sunday evening/overnight up to a maximum of 63.9% during Saturday daytime. 11% of departments participate in a regional out of hours cross-organisation reporting rota. 40% of departments have no 24/7 RIS technical support and 34% have no PACS technical support out of hours. CONCLUSION: There is a wide variation in practice across radiology departments in the UK. Although there are some standards that the majority of hospitals are achieving, there is a significant short-fall in fundamental aspects of providing acute seven-day care. The multifactorial nature in which these problems have arisen means there is no easy solution to combat these issues. There is a requirement for significant investment and political commitment to improve staffing and infrastructure in order to address the current situation. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: A UK wide evaluation of the current provision of seven-day working in radiology showing 54% of hospitals do not have a UK working-time regulations compliant Interventional radiology rota, severe lack of availability of acute MRI out of hours and significant deficiencies in providing technical support out of hours. A sustainable and efficient seven-day service is currently not being provided.

A cross-sectional survey assessing the influence of theoretically informed behavioural factors on hand hygiene across seven countries during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Human hygiene behaviours influence the transmission of infectious diseases. Changing maladaptive hygiene habits has the potential to improve public health. Parents and teachers can play an important role in disinfecting surface areas and in helping children develop healthful handwashing habits. The current study aims to inform a future intervention that will help parents and teachers take up this role using a theoretically and empirically informed behaviour change model called the Capabilities-Opportunities-Motivations-Behaviour (COM-B) model. METHODS: A cross-sectional online survey was designed to measure participants' capabilities, opportunities, and motivations to [1] increase their children's handwashing with soap and [2] increase their cleaning of surface areas. Additional items captured how often participants believed their children washed their hands. The final survey was administered early in the coronavirus pandemic (May and June 2020) to 3975 participants from Australia, China, India, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, and the United Kingdom. Participants self-identified as mums, dads, or teachers of children 5 to 10 years old. ANOVAs analyses were used to compare participant capabilities, opportunities, and motivations across countries for handwashing and surface disinfecting. Multiple regressions analyses were conducted for each country to assess the predictive relationship between the COM-B components and children's handwashing. RESULTS: The ANOVA analyses revealed that India had the lowest levels of capability, opportunity, and motivation, for both hand hygiene and surface cleaning. The regression analyses revealed that for Australia, Indonesia, and South Africa, the capability component was the only significant predictor of children's handwashing. For India, capability and opportunity were significant. For the United Kingdom, capability and motivation were significant. Lastly, for Saudi Arabia all components were significant. CONCLUSIONS: The discussion explores how the Behaviour Change Wheel methodology could be used to guide further intervention development with community stakeholders in each country. Of the countries assessed, India offers the greatest room for improvement, and behaviour change techniques that influence people's capability and opportunities should be prioritised there.

Imaging in myeloma: a Royal College of Radiologists national survey of current imaging practice.

AIMS: To evaluate current national imaging practice in myeloma with reference to National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines (NG35, 2016) and compare results with an initial survey conducted in 2017 (61 participating sites). MATERIALS AND METHODS: All UK radiology departments treating myeloma patients and with a Royal College of Radiologists (RCR) Audit Lead were invited to participate. Data were collected using an online questionnaire. Descriptive statistics were performed. RESULTS: One hundred and fourteen hospitals supplied data (54% return rate). Skeletal survey (SS) remains the most-commonly performed first-line imaging test for suspected/confirmed myeloma or plasmacytoma (39%, 45/114 hospitals), followed by whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (WBMRI) (27%, 31/114) and whole-body computed tomography (WBCT) (19%, 22/114). Integrated positron-emission tomography/CT (PET/CT) was first-line in 14% (16/114). The NICE recommended initial investigation, WBMRI, is currently offered in 27% of surveyed hospitals (<10% in 2017). Ongoing challenges to implementing WBMRI include scanner availability, financial constraints, reporting time, and radiologist training. CONCLUSION: Despite NICE recommendations regarding WBMRI in diagnosis/follow-up of myeloma, SS (poor sensitivity and specificity) remains the most commonly performed first-line test. Radiologists, haematologists, and patients should continue to emphasise the superiority and benefit of modern and more accurate imaging, such that they are prioritised in clinical service planning.

Accelerated implementation of remote reporting during the COVID-19 pandemic.

AIM: To assess, via a survey of UK radiological departments, if the COVID-19 pandemic led to a change in radiological reporting undertaken in a home environment with appropriate IT support. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All imaging departments in the UK were contacted and asked about the provision of home reporting and IT support before and after the first wave of the pandemic. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty-seven of the 217 departments contacted replied, producing a response rate of 61%. There was a 147% increase in the provision of remote access viewing and reporting platforms during the pandemic. Although 578 consultants had access to a viewing platform pre-pandemic, this had increased to 1,431 during the course of the first wave. CONCLUSION: This survey represents work undertaken by UK NHS Trusts in co-ordinating and providing increased home-reporting facilities to UK radiologists during the first wave of this global pandemic. The impact of these facilities has been shown to allow more than just the provision of reporting of both elective and emergency imaging and provides additional flexibility in how UK radiologists can help support and provide services. This is a good start, but there are potential problems that now need to be overcome.

Implementation of Royal College of Radiologists Consensus Statements and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Guidance: Breast Radiotherapy Practice in the UK.

AIMS: Breast radiotherapy practice, driven by large randomised controls trials, is increasingly being risk adapted to the biology and stage of the cancer. The aim of this audit was to measure current breast radiotherapy practice in the UK against quality standards from the 2016 Royal College of Radiologists (RCR) consensus statements and the 2018 updated National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines. These guidelines include new recommendations for partial breast irradiation for women at lower risk of recurrence and internal mammary chain radiotherapy for those at higher risk. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Radiotherapy departments completed a questionnaire for all patients starting adjuvant radiotherapy for early breast cancer in a 2-week period mid-2019. RESULTS: Eighty-one per cent of centres returned data on 958 patients, including 18 bilateral cancers. Of 976 breast cancers, 23.9% were treated with mastectomy. The dose fractionation schedule for adjuvant radiotherapy was 40 Gy in 15 fractions in 95.7% of cases. Of the 743 cases treated with breast conservation, 29.9% received an additional tumour bed boost. The boost was given sequentially in 91.9% of cases and with eight different dose fractionation schedules. Of 494 left-sided breast cancer cases, 54% (n = 267) received radiotherapy in deep inspiratory breath hold. All centres except one had a deep inspiratory breath hold technique available. Only 12% of patients who met the RCR criteria for partial breast irradiation received it. Overall, 14.7% and 9.9% of patients meeting the RCR and NICE criteria for internal mammary chain radiotherapy, respectively, received it. CONCLUSIONS: Despite established consensus statements and NICE guidelines there persists variation in breast radiotherapy practice in the UK. The results of practice-changing trials showing the benefit of cardiac-sparing radiotherapy techniques, partial breast radiotherapy and internal mammary nodal radiotherapy have not been fully implemented. This audit highlights areas for targeted quality improvement and future consensus statements.

A national UK audit for diagnostic accuracy of preoperative CT chest in emergency and elective surgery during COVID-19 pandemic.

AIM: To report on a snap audit of all departments in the UK as to the value of preoperative thoracic imaging, preferably computed tomography (CT), of patients undergoing any surgery to assess for changes consistent with COVID-19 preoperatively. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All Imaging departments in the UK were contacted and asked to record the number of preoperative CT examinations performed in patients being considered for both emergency and elective surgical intervention over a 5-day period in May 2020. RESULTS: Forty-seven percent of departments replied with data provided on >820 patients. Nineteen percent of additional preoperative CT was in patients undergoing elective intervention and 81% in patients presenting with surgical abdominal pain. There was a high rate of false positives in patients who tested negative for COVID-19, producing a sensitivity for thoracic CT of 68.4%. CONCLUSION: This UK-wide audit demonstrates that a large number of additional thoracic imaging examinations over a 5-day period were performed with a low sensitivity for the identification of COVID-19 in this preoperative group of patients. Given these findings, it is difficult to justify this additional examination in this group of patients.

A national audit of radiology practice in cancer multidisciplinary team meetings.

AIM: A national audit reviewing compliance of imaging departments with the Royal College of Radiologist (RCR) standards for cancer multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTMs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The audit consisted of a generic and subspecialty component completed for breast, colorectal, and lung cancer MDTMs. RESULTS: The study achieved the highest response from a RCR national audit with 145/191 (76%) hospitals responding. Compliance with the RCR standards was suboptimal, particularly relating to MDTM attendance, documentation, and reviewing MDTM imaging. Comprehensive radiology MDTM attendance occurred in 52-65%, a supplementary report denoting staging/treatment plans happened in 15-26%, and late additions were discussed frequently without prior review of imaging (44-77%). Contributing factors maybe 13% of radiologists had no programmed activity for MDTMs in their job plan and a perceived negative impact of increasing MDTM referrals (51%). Adjuncts to improve MDTM workload, such as treatment pathways/algorithms (breast/colorectal 54%) and pro-forma (43-50%), were poorly implemented. Discrepancies with the original imaging report highlighted at MDTMs were well documented (92-94%) and frequently presented at discrepancy meetings (70-81%). Learning from involvement in MDTM was well communicated with 76-84% providing peer feedback. CONCLUSIONS: Radiologists are unable to comprehensively attain the RCR MDTM standards on providing and documenting a specialist opinion on the imaging. Increasing referrals to the MDTM appears the predominant factor and differentiating complex cases that benefit from MDTM discussion from those that can be managed via treatment pathways is required. Improved utilisation of pre-MDTMs/pro-forma and information technology in MDTMs may further aid radiologists to provide consistent high-quality contribution towards MDTMs.

UK national cohort of anal cancer treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy: One-year oncological and patient-reported outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Concurrent chemoradiotherapy is the standard treatment for anal cancer. Following national UK implementation of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), this prospective, national cohort evaluates the one-year oncological outcomes and patient-reported toxicity outcomes (PRO) after treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A national cohort of UK cancer centers implementing IMRT was carried out between February to July 2015. Cancer centers provided data on oncological outcomes, including survival, and disease and colostomy status at one-year. EORTC-QLQ core (C30) and colorectal (CR29) questionnaires were completed at baseline and one-year followup. The PRO scores at baseline and one year were compared. RESULTS: 40 UK Cancer Centers returned data with a total of 187 patients included in the analysis. 92% received mitomycin with 5-fluorouracil or capecitabine. One-year overall survival was 94%; 84% were disease-free and 86% colostomy-free at one-year followup. At one year, PRO results found significant improvements in buttock pain, blood and mucus in stools, pain, constipation, appetite loss, and health anxiety compared to baseline. No significant deteriorations were reported in diarrhea, bowel frequency, and flatulence. Urinary symptom scores were low at one year. Moderate impotence symptoms at baseline remained at one year, and a moderate deterioration in dyspareunia reported. CONCLUSIONS: With national anal cancer IMRT implementation, at this early pre-defined time point, one-year oncological outcomes were reassuring and resulted in good disease-related symptom control. one-year symptomatic complications following CRT for anal cancer using IMRT techniques appear to be relatively mild. These PRO results provide a basis to benchmark future studies.

Royal College of Radiologists national audit evaluating the provision of imaging in the severely injured patient and compliance with national guidelines.

AIM: To evaluate the provision of imaging in severely injured patients and com pliance with national guidelines. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two data collection tools were sent to all Royal College of Radiologist audit leads in radiology departments with an emergency department throughout the UK. The first focused on configuration of radiology departments, number of patients scanned for major trauma and service configuration for major trauma. The second focused on reporting times for 30 patients scanned for major trauma. RESULTS: Eighty-five out of 191 (45%) eligible departments responded: 16 (19%) from major trauma centres, 52 (61%) from trauma units and 17 (20%) from other hospitals with an emergency department. Data were collected for 2,161 scans: 450 from major trauma centres, 1,400 from trauma units and 311 from emergency departments. Seven hundred and eighty-four (36%) scans were performed in hours and 1361 (63%) out of hours. Two hundred and forty (11%) scans had a primary survey report documented, of which 53 (22%) were unavailable to clinicians after 20 minutes. Time to final consultant report was within 1 hour for 1,033 (48%) scans and within 2 hours for an additional 540 (25%) scans. 34/85 (40%) departments have registrars first on call for major trauma who report scans out of hours and have a consultant final report the next day. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights significant deficiencies in care and imaging of severely injured patients within major trauma centres and trauma units. Infrastructure and staffing have been underfunded and under resourced to meet rapidly changing best practice requirements in the management of major trauma.

Radiotherapy Management of Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer: Evaluation of a National Cohort.

AIMS: With the failure to improve outcomes of patients with bladder cancer over the last 30 years, this study was developed to benchmark contemporary UK radiotherapy practice for the management of muscle invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) against published national guidance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All UK radiotherapy centres were invited to complete a questionnaire for each patient with MIBC starting bladder radiotherapy over a 16-week period from December 2016. RESULTS: Sixty-nine per cent (41/59) of UK radiotherapy centres completed a detailed questionnaire for 508 patients. The median age was 78 years and 64% (n = 323 patients) had stage II or III disease. Treatment intent was radical in 54% (n = 275). From transurethral resection of the bladder tumour, patients waited 57 days before starting neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) (interquartile range 46-72 days). Patients who had radical radiotherapy as their first definitive treatment waited a median of 82 days (interquartile range 62-105 days). NAC was considered in 66% (n = 182) of all radical cases and given in 43% (n = 119). Concurrent radiosensitisation (CRT) was considered for 53% (n = 146) and delivered in 40% (n = 109) of patients. The most common fractionation was 55 Gy/20 fractions/4 weeks in 49% (n = 134) for radical patients and 36 Gy/6 fractions/6 weeks in 25% (n = 57) for palliative patients. CONCLUSION: This is the largest multicentre prospective study to define contemporary management of MIBC in patients receiving radiotherapy within the UK. The population studied is the oldest described to date. Timelines to starting definitive treatment confirm an urgent need to streamline the pathway. An increasing use of NAC is described, although the penetrance of CRT is disappointingly low. Areas for improvement with regards to the delivery and quality of radiotherapy have been identified. The detail within this study can be used to inform practice and future trial design, ultimately with the aim of improving outcomes for patients with MIBC.