Review of the Viability Audit process: analysis of post-primary school data

This paper provides an analysis of the post-primary school data provided in the viability audit report published in February 2012 and complements a paper already prepared with an analysis of primary school data. The Viability Audit has been led by the Education and Library Boards, working in close conjunction with CCMS. The Area Planning process was led by the Department of Education, working with the Education and Library Boards and CCMS.

Review of the Viability Audit process: analysis of primary school data

This paper provides an analysis of the primary school data provided in the viability audit report published in February 2012. The Viability Audit has been led by the Education and Library Boards, working in close conjunction with CCMS. The Area Planning process was led by the Department of Education, working with the Education and Library Boards and CCMS. Draft area planning reports, and revised reports following consultation, have been published for post primary schools; draft area planning reports for primary schools have been published and are not out for consultation. It should be noted that the draft area plan reports for primary schools used updated data available to the ELBs so some of the patterns will differ slightly from those reported in the analysis below.

Pre-Radiotherapy Dental Assessment of Head and Neck Oncology Patients: An Audit.

Objectives: Approximately 300 people are diagnosed with Head and Neck cancer annually in Northern Ireland. The management may include treatment by surgery or by chemotherapy and radiotherapy,
or a combination of modalities. Patients whose oral cavity, teeth, salivary glands and jaws that
will be affected by treatment, particularly radiotherapy should have a pre-treatment assessment. This should be done as early as possible to maximise the time available for dental management. However, this can be challenging owing to the complexities of cancer diagnosis, treatment planning and multidisciplinary management. At the Belfast Dental Hospital, a number of patients were referred post- radiotherapy with complications after not having received a pre-treatment assessment. The referrals for pre- treatment dental assessment were also late in patients’ multidisciplinary journey, limiting the time period
for dental input. The purpose of this audit was to examine the time period between dental assessment and commencement of radiotherapy and whether this was an adequate time frame for dental management. This audit will also examine the dental diseases present and the treatments required pre-radiotherapy. Methods: Data for this audit was collected over 4 months in 2012
by analysing the dental charts and referrals of new patients who were referred to and attended the dental head and neck oncology clinic. A standardised referral pro-forma was introduced from September 2013 to improve the referral process.
A re-audit was conducted over 4 months in 2014. Data was collected similarly as previous. The time period between dental assessment and commencement of radiotherapy was examined. The presence of dental disease and subsequent treatments required were also noted.
Results: 63 new patients were examined in the dental head and neck oncology clinic over 4 months in 2012. 48 (76.2%) were examined pre-radiotherapy. The average length of time between dental assessment and radiotherapy commencement was 11 days. A new standardised referral pro-forma was introduced in 2013. In the re-audit, 65 new patients were seen over 4 months in 2014.
60 (92.3%) patients were examined pre-radiotherapy. The average length of time between dental assessment and radiotherapy commencement was 18 days.
Conclusion: Given the high prevalence of pre-existing dental disease amongst head and neck cancer patients, prompt dental assessment and treatment is vital. Efforts aimed at improving the care pathway are on-going through the implementation of a mandatory referral pro-forma and a dedicated assessment clinic.

The role of complexity metrics in a multi-institutional dosimetry audit of VMAT

OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate the benefit of complexity metrics such as the modulation complexity score (MCS) and monitor units (MUs) in multi-institutional audits of volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) delivery.

METHODS: 39 VMAT treatment plans were analysed using MCS and MU. A virtual phantom planning exercise was planned and independently measured using the PTW Octavius(®) phantom and seven29(®) 2D array (PTW-Freiburg GmbH, Freiburg, Germany). MCS and MU were compared with the median gamma index pass rates (2%/2 and 3%/3 mm) and plan quality. The treatment planning systems (TPS) were grouped by VMAT modelling being specifically designed for the linear accelerator manufacturer's own treatment delivery system (Type 1) or independent of vendor for VMAT delivery (Type 2). Differences in plan complexity (MCS and MU) between TPS types were compared.

RESULTS: For Varian(®) linear accelerators (Varian(®) Medical Systems, Inc., Palo Alto, CA), MCS and MU were significantly correlated with gamma pass rates. Type 2 TPS created poorer quality, more complex plans with significantly higher MUs and MCS than Type 1 TPS. Plan quality was significantly correlated with MU for Type 2 plans. A statistically significant correlation was observed between MU and MCS for all plans (R = -0.84, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION: MU and MCS have a role in assessing plan complexity in audits along with plan quality metrics. Plan complexity metrics give some indication of plan deliverability but should be analysed with plan quality.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Complexity metrics were investigated for a national rotational audit involving 34 institutions and they showed value. The metrics found that more complex plans were created for planning systems which were independent of vendor for VMAT delivery.