Expert opinion on best practice guidelines and competency framework for visual screening in children

PURPOSE: Screening programs to detect visual abnormalities in children vary among countries. The aim of this study is to describe experts' perception of best practice guidelines and competency framework for visual screening in children. METHODS: A qualitative focus group technique was applied during the Portuguese national orthoptic congress to obtain the perception of an expert panel of 5 orthoptists and 2 ophthalmologists with experience in visual screening for children (mean age 53.43 years, SD ± 9.40). The panel received in advance a script with the description of three tuning competencies dimensions (instrumental, systemic, and interpersonal) for visual screening. The session was recorded in video and audio. Qualitative data were analyzed using a categorical technique. RESULTS: According to experts' views, six tests (35.29%) have to be included in a visual screening: distance visual acuity test, cover test, bi-prism or 4/6(Δ) prism, fusion, ocular movements, and refraction. Screening should be performed according to the child age before and after 3 years of age (17.65%). The expert panel highlighted the influence of the professional experience in the application of a screening protocol (23.53%). They also showed concern about the false negatives control (23.53%). Instrumental competencies were the most cited (54.09%), followed by interpersonal (29.51%) and systemic (16.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Orthoptists should have professional experience before starting to apply a screening protocol. False negative results are a concern that has to be more thoroughly investigated. The proposed framework focuses on core competencies highlighted by the expert panel. Competencies programs could be important do develop better screening programs.

Comparison of inverse planning systems based on biological or physical factors: Pinnacle®, Corvus® and Monaco®

Radiotherapy (RT) is one of the most important approaches in the treatment of cancer and its performance can be improved in three different ways: through the optimization of the dose distribution, by the use of different irradiation techniques or through the study of radiobiological initiatives. The first is purely physical because is related to the physical dose distributiuon. The others are purely radiobiological because they increase the differential effect between the tumour and the health tissues. The Treatment Planning Systems (TPS) are used in RT to create dose distributions with the purpose to maximize the tumoral control and minimize the complications in the healthy tissues. The inverse planning uses dose optimization techniques that satisfy the criteria specified by the user, regarding the target and the organs at risk (OAR’s). The dose optimization is possible through the analysis of dose-volume histograms (DVH) and with the use of computed tomography, magnetic resonance and other digital image techniques.

Formaldehyde: exposure and genotoxicity assessments and potential health effects

Worldwide formaldehyde is manipulated with diverse usage properties, since industrial purposes to health laboratory objectives, representing the economic importance of this chemical agent. Therefore, many people are exposed to formaldehyde environmentally and/or occupationally. Considering the latter, there was recommended occupational exposure limits based on threshold mechanisms, limit values and indoor guidelines. Formaldehyde is classified by the International Agency for Cancer Research (IARC) as carcinogenic to humans (group 1), since a wide range of epidemiological studies in occupational exposure settings have suggested possible links between the concentration and duration of exposure and elevated risks of nasopharyngeal cancer, and others cancers, and more recently, with leukemia. Although there are different classifications, such as U.S. EPA that classified formaldehyde as a B1 compound, probable human carcinogen under the conditions of unusually high or prolonged exposure, on basis of limited evidence in humans but with sufficient evidence in animals. Formaldehyde genotoxicity is well-known, being a direct-acting genotoxic compound positively associated for almost all genetic endpoints evaluated in bacteria, yeast, fungi, plants, insects, nematodes, and cultured mammalian cells. There are many human biomonitoring studies that associate formaldehyde occupational exposure to genomic instability, and consequently possible health effects. Besides the link with cancer, also other pathologies and symptoms are associated with formaldehyde exposure, namely respiratory disorders such as asthma, and allergic contact dermatitis. Nowadays, there are efforts to reduce formaldehyde exposure, namely indoor. Europe and United States developed more strict regulation regarding formaldehyde emissions from materials containing this agent. Despite the regulations and restrictions, formaldehyde still continues to be difficult to eliminate or substitute, being biomonitoring an important tool to control possible future health effects.

Environmental mycology in public health: fungi and mycotoxins risk assessment and management

Fungi are essential to the survival of our global ecology, but they might pose a significant threat to the health of occupants when they grow in our buildings. The exposure to fungi in homes is a significant risk factor for a number of respiratory symptoms. Well-known illnesses caused by fungi include allergy and hypersensitivity pneumonitis. Environmental monitoring for fungi and their disease agents are important aspects of exposure assessment, but few guidelines exist for interpreting their health impacts. This book answers the questions: How does one detect and measure the presence of indoor fungi? What is an acceptable level of indoor fungi? How do we relate this information to human health problems?