Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 1/2021

Open Access 01-12-2021 | Care | Research article

Will virtual multidisciplinary team meetings become the norm for musculoskeletal oncology care following the COVID-19 pandemic? - experience from a tertiary sarcoma centre

Authors: Raja Bhaskara Rajasekaran, Duncan Whitwell, Thomas D. A. Cosker, Christopher L. M. H. Gibbons, Andrew Carr

Published in: BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders | Issue 1/2021

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Like with all cancers, multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings are the norm in bone and soft tissue tumour (BST) management too. Problem in attendance of specialists due to geographical location is the one of the key barriers to effective functioning of MDTs. To overcome this problem, virtual MDTs involving videoconferencing or telemedicine have been proposed, but however this has been seldom used and tested. The COVID-19 pandemic forced the implementation of virtual MDTs in the Oxford sarcoma service in order to maintain normal service provision. We conducted a survey among the participants to evaluate its efficacy.

Methods

An online questionnaire comprising of 24 questions organised into 4 sections was circulated among all participants of the MDT after completion of 8 virtual MDTs. Opinions were sought comparing virtual MDTs to the conventional face-to-face MDTs on various aspects. A total of 36 responses were received and were evaluated.

Results

72.8% were satisfied with the depth of discussion in virtual MDTs and 83.3% felt that the decision-making in diagnosis had not changed following the switch from face-to-face MDTs. About 86% reported to have all essential patient data was available to make decisions and 88.9% were satisfied with the time for discussion of patient issues over virtual platform. Three-fourths of the participants were satisfied (36.1% - highly satisfied; 38.9% - moderately satisfied) with virtual MDTs and 55.6% of them were happy to attend MDTs only by the virtual platform in the future. Regarding future, 77.8% of the participants opined that virtual MDTs would be the future of cancer care and an overwhelming majority (91.7%) felt that the present exercise would serve as a precursor to global MDTs involving specialists from abroad in the future.

Conclusion

Our study shows that the forced switch to virtual MDTs in sarcoma care following the unprecedented COVID-19 pandemic to be a viable and effective alternative to conventional face-to-face MDTs. With effective and efficient software in place, virtual MDTs would also facilitate in forming extended MDTs in seeking opinions on complex cases from specialists abroad and can expand cancer care globally.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Fleissig A, Jenkins V, Catt S, Fallowfield L. Multidisciplinary teams in cancer care: are they effective in the UK? Lancet Oncol. 2006;7:935–43.CrossRef Fleissig A, Jenkins V, Catt S, Fallowfield L. Multidisciplinary teams in cancer care: are they effective in the UK? Lancet Oncol. 2006;7:935–43.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Henson DE. Tumor Board Survey: Report of Community Oncology and Rehabilitation Branch, National Cancer Institute. Bethesda: National Cancer Institute; 1987. Henson DE. Tumor Board Survey: Report of Community Oncology and Rehabilitation Branch, National Cancer Institute. Bethesda: National Cancer Institute; 1987.
4.
go back to reference Forrest LM, McMillan DC, McArdle CS, Dunlop DJ. An evaluation of the impact of a multidisciplinary team, in a single centre, on treatment and survival in patients with inoperable non-small-cell lung cancer. Br J Cancer. 2005;93:977–8.CrossRef Forrest LM, McMillan DC, McArdle CS, Dunlop DJ. An evaluation of the impact of a multidisciplinary team, in a single centre, on treatment and survival in patients with inoperable non-small-cell lung cancer. Br J Cancer. 2005;93:977–8.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Junor EJ, Hole DJ, Gillis CR. Management of ovarian cancer: referral to a multidisciplinary team matters. Br J Cancer. 1994;70:363–70.CrossRef Junor EJ, Hole DJ, Gillis CR. Management of ovarian cancer: referral to a multidisciplinary team matters. Br J Cancer. 1994;70:363–70.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Houssami N, Sainsbury R. Breast cancer: multidisciplinary care and clinical outcomes. Eur J Cancer. 2006;42:2480–91.CrossRef Houssami N, Sainsbury R. Breast cancer: multidisciplinary care and clinical outcomes. Eur J Cancer. 2006;42:2480–91.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference The national cancer act of 1971. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1972;48(3):577–84. The national cancer act of 1971. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1972;48(3):577–84.
8.
go back to reference Fleming ID. Multidisciplinary treatment planning. Tumor boards. Cancer. 1989;64(Suppl 1):279–81 discussion: 282–4.CrossRef Fleming ID. Multidisciplinary treatment planning. Tumor boards. Cancer. 1989;64(Suppl 1):279–81 discussion: 282–4.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Expert Advisory Group on Cancer. A policy framework for commissioning cancer services: a report to the chief medical officers of England and Wales. The Calman–Hine Report. London: Department of Health; 1995. Expert Advisory Group on Cancer. A policy framework for commissioning cancer services: a report to the chief medical officers of England and Wales. The Calman–Hine Report. London: Department of Health; 1995.
10.
go back to reference Department of Health. The NHS cancer plan: a plan for investment, a plan for reform. London: Department of Health; 2000. Department of Health. The NHS cancer plan: a plan for investment, a plan for reform. London: Department of Health; 2000.
13.
go back to reference Kee F, Owen T, Leathem R. Decision making in a multidisciplinary cancer team: does team discussion result in better quality decisions? Med Decis Making. 2004;24:602–13.CrossRef Kee F, Owen T, Leathem R. Decision making in a multidisciplinary cancer team: does team discussion result in better quality decisions? Med Decis Making. 2004;24:602–13.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Bradley PJ, Zutshi B, Nutting CM. An audit of clinical resources available for the care of head and neck cancer patients in England. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2005;17:604–9.CrossRef Bradley PJ, Zutshi B, Nutting CM. An audit of clinical resources available for the care of head and neck cancer patients in England. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2005;17:604–9.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Borrill C, West M, Shapiro D, Rees A. Team working and eff ectiveness in health care. Br J Health Care Manage. 2000;6:364–71.CrossRef Borrill C, West M, Shapiro D, Rees A. Team working and eff ectiveness in health care. Br J Health Care Manage. 2000;6:364–71.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Whelan JM, Griffi th CD, Archer T. Breast cancer multi-disciplinary teams in England: much achieved but still more to be done. Breast. 2006;15:119–22.CrossRef Whelan JM, Griffi th CD, Archer T. Breast cancer multi-disciplinary teams in England: much achieved but still more to be done. Breast. 2006;15:119–22.CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Kelly MJ, Lloyd TD, Marshall D, et al. A snapshot of MDT working and patient mapping in the UK colorectal cancer centres in 2002. Colorectal Dis. 2003;5:577–81.CrossRef Kelly MJ, Lloyd TD, Marshall D, et al. A snapshot of MDT working and patient mapping in the UK colorectal cancer centres in 2002. Colorectal Dis. 2003;5:577–81.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Will virtual multidisciplinary team meetings become the norm for musculoskeletal oncology care following the COVID-19 pandemic? - experience from a tertiary sarcoma centre
Authors
Raja Bhaskara Rajasekaran
Duncan Whitwell
Thomas D. A. Cosker
Christopher L. M. H. Gibbons
Andrew Carr
Publication date
01-12-2021
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders / Issue 1/2021
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2474
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-020-03925-8

Other articles of this Issue 1/2021

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 1/2021 Go to the issue