Questionnaire survey on Canine Leishmaniosis in southeastern Spain

A veterinary practitioner's questionnaire survey on Canine Leishmaniosis (CanL) was carried out in southeast Spain to provide information on disease incidence, diagnosis and recommended preventive measures. A third of 101 responding veterinarians reported seeing more than 20 CanL cases during the previous year and clinical signs considered frequent or very frequent included weight loss, areas of exfoliative dermatitis, lymphadenomegaly, kidney dysfunction, onychogryphosis, cutaneous ulcers, anaemia, asthenia and apathy. Almost a third of veterinarians reported diagnosing CanL solely on the basis of lack of response to treatment for other chronic illnesses. The frequency of individual signs did not always reflect their diagnostic value. The majority of veterinarians, considered lymphadenomegaly, exfoliative dermatitis, onychogryphosis, weight loss and epistaxis to be the best disease indicators. However, up to 93% of veterinarians reported using laboratory tests to confirm infection, including indirect (biochemical and antibody assays) and direct (PCR and microscopy) methods. Among recommended measures to prevent CanL, insecticide impregnated collars and topical spot-on capsules were prescribed by 92% and 74% of respondents; however, at least 11% of veterinarians believed existing CanL preventive measures were ineffective. Multivariable statistical analysis indicated that seeing more than 20 CanL cases during the previous year was independently associated with being located in Alicante province, having a rural clientele and recognising that dogs with no other sign but a lack of response to other chronic disease treatments may be infected with CanL. There was a weak association between CanL incidence and rainfall in the months prior to typical sandfly peak abundance.

Radiation therapy treatment verification imaging in Australia and New Zealand

An original questionnaire was used to investigate the available types of reference and treatment image verification equipment and specific practices related to image analysis. A section on treatment site-specific imaging was included. The questionnaire was distributed to all radiation oncology facilities in Australia and New Zealand. A response rate of 87% (40/46) was achieved. Most facilities (90%) in Australia and New Zealand reported the availability of electronic portal imaging devices. Use of computer software to assist with image interpretation was indicated by 92% of centres. Frequency of image acquisition and tolerance levels used for radical treatment sites were variable, but palliative treatment site protocols were more consistent between treatment facilities. In conclusion, departments should strive to use evidence-based protocols and guidelines to ensure acceptable accuracy in treatment delivery.