Search

Fusarium oxysporum f.sp. cubense, causal agent of Panama disease, is one of the biggest threats to global banana production, particularly the Cavendish competent tropical race 4 (Foc TR4). It continues to spread globally with detections occurring in regions of the Middle East and new continents such as Africa and South America in the last decade. As the search was on for new management strategies and resistant cultivars to combat the disease, a banana cultivar-screening trial took place in the Northern Territory of Australia, which examined the responses of 24 banana cultivars to the soil borne fungus. These cultivars included material from TBRI, FHIA and selections from Thailand, Indonesia and Australia and evaluated for their resistance to tropical race 4 for two cropping cycles. Several cultivars displayed considerable resistance to Foc TR4, including several FHIA parental lines and hybrids, the Cavendish (AAA) selections GCTCV 215 and GCTCV 247 from TBRI and an Indonesian selection CJ19 showed either very little to no plant death due to the disease.

ObjectivesTo explore the views of intermittent catheter (IC) users regarding the advantages and disadvantages of single-use or reuse of catheters.DesignQualitative study with semi-structured interviews. The interviews were recorded, transcribed and analysed thematically.SettingParticipant’s own homes in Hampshire and Dorset, UK.ParticipantsA convenience sample of 39 IC users, aged 23–86 years, using IC for at least 3 months.ResultsThe analysis revealed four main themes: concerns regarding risk of urinary tract infection (UTI); cleaning, preparation and storage; social responsibility; practicalities and location. The main concern was safety, with the fear that reuse could increase risk of UTI compared with single-use sterile catheters. If shown to be safe then around half of participants thought they might consider reusing catheters. The practicalities of cleaning methods (extra products, time and storage) were considered potentially burdensome for reuse; but for single-use, ease of use and instant usability were advantages. Always having a catheter without fear of ‘running out’ was considered an advantage of reuse. Some participants were concerned about environmental impact (waste) and cost of single-use catheters. The potential for reuse was usually dependent on location. The analysis showed that often the disadvantages of single-use could be off-set by the advantages of reuse and vice versa, for example, the need to take many single-use catheters on holiday could be addressed by reuse, while the burden of cleaning would be obviated by single-use.ConclusionsIf shown to be safe with a practical cleaning method, some participants would find reuse an acceptable option, alongside their current single-use method. The choice to use a mixture of single-use and reuse of catheters for different activities (at home, work or holiday) could optimise the perceived advantages and disadvantages of both. The safety and acceptability of such an approach would require testing in a clinical trial.