Objective To investigate the applications of antibacterial agents to outpatients in primary hos -pitals in Hefei City of Anhui Province,and to provide reference for rational use of antibacterial agents.Methods In 2011, fourty-five primary hospitals in Hefei City were selected randomly ,including urban community health service centers (Group A) and township hospitals(Group B),and thirty or fourty outpatient prescriptions were analyzed monthly . Results In Group A, the percentage and intensity of antimicrobial usage , the proportion of the combination and injectable formulation were ( 45.36 ±20.02 )%, ( 89.73 ±25.50 ) DDDs · ( 100 cases ) -1 · d-1 , 13.34%, 23.16%,respectively,and the data in Group B were (61.36 ±17.18)%,(108.46 ±32.27)DDDs· (100 cases) -1 · d-1,29.13%,46.39%,respectively,which the former were significantly lower than the latter.Conclusion In primary hospitals,the applications of antibacterial agents to outpatiants are not rataional ,including high percentages of usage and unreasonable selection of species ,and more supervision and training need to be given to the medical staff , especially in township hospitals .

Objective:To compare the population characteristics, the positive rate of screening, the detection rate of breast cancer, early diagnosis rate and the cost between the mass screening group and opportunistic screening group of breast cancer.Methods:This study is a prospective multicenter cohort study conducted from January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2016. The participants were enrolled for mass screening or opportunistic screening of breast cancer. After completing the questionnaire, all the participants received breast physical examination and breast ultrasound examination every year for 3 rounds by year. The participants′ characteristics and screening results of the two groups were compared by χ 2 test, Fisher exact test or Wilcoxon rank-sum test. Results:A total of 20 080 subjects were enrolled. In the mass screening group, 9 434 (100%), 8 111 (85.98%) and 3 940 (41.76%) cases completed the 3 rounds of screening, and 10 646 (100%), 6 209 (58.32%) and 2 988 (28.07%) cases in the opportunistic screening group, respectively. In the opportunistic screening group, the proportions of less than 3 months lactation (1 275/9 796 vs. 1 061/8 860, χ2=4.597, P=0.032), non-fertility (850/10 646 vs. 574/9 434, χ2=27.400, P<0.01), abortion history (6 384/10 646 vs. 5 062/9 434, χ2=81.232, P<0.01), postmenopausal (2 776/10 646 vs. 2 217/9 434, χ2=17.757, P<0.01), long-term oral contraceptives(>6 months) (171/10 646 vs. 77/9 434, χ2=25.593, P<0.01) and family history of breast cancer in first-degree relatives (464/10 646 vs. 236/9 434, χ2=51.257, P<0.01) were significantly higher than those in mass screening group. The positive rate of screening (514/10 646 vs. 128/9 434, χ2=194.736, P<0.01), the detection rate of breast cancer (158/10 646 vs. 13/9 434, χ2=107.374, P<0.01), and positive rate of biopsy (158/452 vs. 13/87, χ2=13.491, P<0.01) in the opportunistic screening group were significantly higher than those of the mass screening group. The early diagnosis rate of the mass screening group was significantly higher than the opportunistic screening group (10/12 vs. 66/141, χ2=5.902, P=0.015). The average cost for detecting each breast cancer case of the mass screening group was 215 038 CNY, which was 13.6 times of the opportunistic screening group (15 799 CNY/case). In the opportunistic screening group, the positive rate of biopsy in primary hospitals was significantly lower than that in large-volume hospitals (79/267 vs. 79/185, χ2=8.267, P=0.004), but there was no significant difference in the mass screening group (6/37 vs. 7/50, χ2=0.082, P=0.774). Conclusions:Breast cancer screening can improve early detection rate. Compared with the mass screening mode, the opportunistic screening mode has the advantages of higher proportion of high-risk factors, higher positive rate of screening, higher detection rate of breast cancer, higher positive rate of biopsy, and lower cost of screening. However, the early diagnosis rate of breast cancer of opportunistic screening is lower than that of mass screening. The positive rate of opportunistic screening in primary hospitals is lower than that of large-volume hospitals. The two screening modes have their own advantages and should be chosen according to local conditions of different regions in China.

Objective:To compare the population characteristics, the positive rate of screening, the detection rate of breast cancer, early diagnosis rate and the cost between the mass screening group and opportunistic screening group of breast cancer.Methods:This study is a prospective multicenter cohort study conducted from January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2016. The participants were enrolled for mass screening or opportunistic screening of breast cancer. After completing the questionnaire, all the participants received breast physical examination and breast ultrasound examination every year for 3 rounds by year. The participants′ characteristics and screening results of the two groups were compared by χ 2 test, Fisher exact test or Wilcoxon rank-sum test. Results:A total of 20 080 subjects were enrolled. In the mass screening group, 9 434 (100%), 8 111 (85.98%) and 3 940 (41.76%) cases completed the 3 rounds of screening, and 10 646 (100%), 6 209 (58.32%) and 2 988 (28.07%) cases in the opportunistic screening group, respectively. In the opportunistic screening group, the proportions of less than 3 months lactation (1 275/9 796 vs. 1 061/8 860, χ2=4.597, P=0.032), non-fertility (850/10 646 vs. 574/9 434, χ2=27.400, P<0.01), abortion history (6 384/10 646 vs. 5 062/9 434, χ2=81.232, P<0.01), postmenopausal (2 776/10 646 vs. 2 217/9 434, χ2=17.757, P<0.01), long-term oral contraceptives(>6 months) (171/10 646 vs. 77/9 434, χ2=25.593, P<0.01) and family history of breast cancer in first-degree relatives (464/10 646 vs. 236/9 434, χ2=51.257, P<0.01) were significantly higher than those in mass screening group. The positive rate of screening (514/10 646 vs. 128/9 434, χ2=194.736, P<0.01), the detection rate of breast cancer (158/10 646 vs. 13/9 434, χ2=107.374, P<0.01), and positive rate of biopsy (158/452 vs. 13/87, χ2=13.491, P<0.01) in the opportunistic screening group were significantly higher than those of the mass screening group. The early diagnosis rate of the mass screening group was significantly higher than the opportunistic screening group (10/12 vs. 66/141, χ2=5.902, P=0.015). The average cost for detecting each breast cancer case of the mass screening group was 215 038 CNY, which was 13.6 times of the opportunistic screening group (15 799 CNY/case). In the opportunistic screening group, the positive rate of biopsy in primary hospitals was significantly lower than that in large-volume hospitals (79/267 vs. 79/185, χ2=8.267, P=0.004), but there was no significant difference in the mass screening group (6/37 vs. 7/50, χ2=0.082, P=0.774). Conclusions:Breast cancer screening can improve early detection rate. Compared with the mass screening mode, the opportunistic screening mode has the advantages of higher proportion of high-risk factors, higher positive rate of screening, higher detection rate of breast cancer, higher positive rate of biopsy, and lower cost of screening. However, the early diagnosis rate of breast cancer of opportunistic screening is lower than that of mass screening. The positive rate of opportunistic screening in primary hospitals is lower than that of large-volume hospitals. The two screening modes have their own advantages and should be chosen according to local conditions of different regions in China.

Objective:To investigate the radiation dose and fractionation regimens for limited stage small cell lung cancer (LS-SCLC) in Chinese radiation oncologists.Methods:Over 500 radiation oncologists were surveyed through questionnaire for radiation dose and fractionation regimens for LS-SCLC and 216 valid samples were collected for further analysis. All data were collected by online questionnaire designed by WJX software. Data collection and statistical analysis were performed by SPSS 25.0 statistical software. The differences in categorical variables among different groups were analyzed by Chi-square test and Fisher's exact test. Results:Among 216 participants, 94.9% preferred early concurrent chemoradiotherapy, 69.4% recommended conventional fractionation, 70.8% preferred a total dose of 60 Gy when delivering conventional radiotherapy and 78.7% recommended 45 Gy when administering hyperfractionated radiotherapy.Conclusions:Despite differences in LS-SCLC treatment plans, most of Chinese radiation oncologists prefer to choose 60 Gy conventional fractionated radiotherapy as the main treatment strategy for LS-SCLC patients. Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO), National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) and Chinese Medical Association guidelines or expert consensus play a critical role in guiding treatment decision-making.