Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology 3/2013

01-03-2013 | Healthcare Policy and Outcomes

Multidisciplinary Cancer Team Meeting Structure and Treatment Decisions: A Prospective Correlational Study

Authors: B. W. Lamb, N. Sevdalis, J. Benn, C. Vincent, J. S. A. Green

Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology | Issue 3/2013

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Anecdotally, organizational factors appear to have an effect on the quality of decision-making in the multidisciplinary team (MDT) meeting. We assess the effect of the number of team-members present, number and order of cases, and the timing of meetings on the process of decision-making in MDT meetings.

Methods

Between December 2009 and January 2010, data were prospectively collected on treatment decisions, meeting characteristics, quality of information, and teamworking for all cases discussed at a London-based MDT meeting. Variables measured using a validated assessment tool (MDT MODe) and correlational analyses were performed.

Results

Treatment decisions were reached in 254 of 298 (85 %) cases. Cases toward the end of meetings were associated with lower rates of decision-making, information quality, and teamworking (r = −0.15 to −0.37). Increased number of cases per meeting and team members in attendance were associated with better information and teamworking (r = 0.29–0.43). More time per case was associated with improved teamworking (r = 0.16). A positive correlation was obtained between ability to reach decisions and improved information and teamworking (r = 0.36–0.54; all P ≤ 0.001).

Conclusions

Organizational factors related to the structure of the MDT meeting are associated with variation in the likelihood of reaching a treatment decision. Further research is required to establish causation and to modify such factors in order to improve the quality of cancer care.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Taylor C, Munro AJ, Glynne-Jones R, et al. Multidisciplinary team working in cancer: what is the evidence? BMJ. 2010;340: c951.PubMedCrossRef Taylor C, Munro AJ, Glynne-Jones R, et al. Multidisciplinary team working in cancer: what is the evidence? BMJ. 2010;340: c951.PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Guidance on cancer services improving outcomes in urological cancers. The Manual. London, UK: National Institute for Clinical Excellence, 2002. National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Guidance on cancer services improving outcomes in urological cancers. The Manual. London, UK: National Institute for Clinical Excellence, 2002.
3.
go back to reference The Department of Health. Manual for cancer services. London, UK: The Department of Health, 2004. The Department of Health. Manual for cancer services. London, UK: The Department of Health, 2004.
4.
go back to reference Circulaire DGS/DH/AFS n° 98-213 Relative a l’organisation des soins en cancerologie dans les etablissements d’hospitalisation publics et prives. Paris, France. 1998;98[17]:177–191. Circulaire DGS/DH/AFS n° 98-213 Relative a l’organisation des soins en cancerologie dans les etablissements d’hospitalisation publics et prives. Paris, France. 1998;98[17]:177–191.
6.
go back to reference McAvoy B. Optimising cancer care in Australia. Melbourne: National Cancer Control Initiative. Aust Fam Physician. 2003;32:369-72.PubMed McAvoy B. Optimising cancer care in Australia. Melbourne: National Cancer Control Initiative. Aust Fam Physician. 2003;32:369-72.PubMed
7.
go back to reference Lamb B, Brown K, Nagpal K, Vincent C, Green JSA, Sevdalis N. Quality of care management decisions by multidisciplinary cancer teams: a systematic review. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011;18:2116-25.PubMedCrossRef Lamb B, Brown K, Nagpal K, Vincent C, Green JSA, Sevdalis N. Quality of care management decisions by multidisciplinary cancer teams: a systematic review. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011;18:2116-25.PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Newman E, Guest A, Helvie M, et al. Changes in surgical management resulting from case review at a breast cancer multidisciplinary tumour board. Cancer. 2006;107:2343-51.CrossRef Newman E, Guest A, Helvie M, et al. Changes in surgical management resulting from case review at a breast cancer multidisciplinary tumour board. Cancer. 2006;107:2343-51.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Hong NJ, Wright FC, Gagliardi AR, Paszat LF. Examining the potential relationship between multidisciplinary cancer care and patient survival: an international literature review. J Surg Oncol. 2010;102:125-34.PubMedCrossRef Hong NJ, Wright FC, Gagliardi AR, Paszat LF. Examining the potential relationship between multidisciplinary cancer care and patient survival: an international literature review. J Surg Oncol. 2010;102:125-34.PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Bogenstätter Y, Tschan F, Semmer NK, Spychiger M, Breuer M, Marsch S. How accurate is information transmitted to medical professionals joining a medical emergency? A simulator study. Hum Factors. 2009;51(2)115-25.PubMedCrossRef Bogenstätter Y, Tschan F, Semmer NK, Spychiger M, Breuer M, Marsch S. How accurate is information transmitted to medical professionals joining a medical emergency? A simulator study. Hum Factors. 2009;51(2)115-25.PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Larson JR, Christensen C, Franz TM, Abbott AS. Diagnosing groups: the pooling, management, and impact of shared and unshared case information in team-based medical decision making. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1998;75(1)93-108.PubMedCrossRef Larson JR, Christensen C, Franz TM, Abbott AS. Diagnosing groups: the pooling, management, and impact of shared and unshared case information in team-based medical decision making. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1998;75(1)93-108.PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Schulz-Hardt S, Brodbeck FC, Mojzisch A, Kerschreiter R, Frey D. Group decision making in hidden profile situations: dissent as a facilitator for decision quality. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1996;91(6)1080-93. Schulz-Hardt S, Brodbeck FC, Mojzisch A, Kerschreiter R, Frey D. Group decision making in hidden profile situations: dissent as a facilitator for decision quality. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1996;91(6)1080-93.
13.
go back to reference Jones P, Roelofsma MP. The potential for social, contextual and group biases in team decision making: biases, conditions and psychological mechanisms. Ergonomics. 2000;43(8):1129–52.PubMedCrossRef Jones P, Roelofsma MP. The potential for social, contextual and group biases in team decision making: biases, conditions and psychological mechanisms. Ergonomics. 2000;43(8):1129–52.PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Kahan JP, Park RE, Leape L, et al. Variations by specialty in physician ratings of the appropriateness and necessity of indications for procedures. Med Care. 1996;6:512–23.CrossRef Kahan JP, Park RE, Leape L, et al. Variations by specialty in physician ratings of the appropriateness and necessity of indications for procedures. Med Care. 1996;6:512–23.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Coulter I, Adams A, Shekelle P. Impact of varying panel membership on ratings of appropriateness in consensus panels: a comparison of a multi- and single disciplinary panel. Health Serv Res. 1995;30:577–91.PubMed Coulter I, Adams A, Shekelle P. Impact of varying panel membership on ratings of appropriateness in consensus panels: a comparison of a multi- and single disciplinary panel. Health Serv Res. 1995;30:577–91.PubMed
16.
go back to reference Lamb B, Green JSA, Vincent C, Sevdalis N. Decision making in surgical oncology. Surg Oncol. 2011;20:163-8.PubMedCrossRef Lamb B, Green JSA, Vincent C, Sevdalis N. Decision making in surgical oncology. Surg Oncol. 2011;20:163-8.PubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Houssami N, Sainsbury R. Breast cancer: multidisciplinary care and clinical outcomes. Eur J Cancer. 2006;42:2480-91.PubMedCrossRef Houssami N, Sainsbury R. Breast cancer: multidisciplinary care and clinical outcomes. Eur J Cancer. 2006;42:2480-91.PubMedCrossRef
18.
go back to reference Kesson EM, Allardice GM, George WD, Burns HJ, Morrison DS. Effects of multidisciplinary team working on breast cancer survival: retrospective, comparative, interventional cohort study of 13,722 women. BMJ. 2012;344:e2718.PubMedCrossRef Kesson EM, Allardice GM, George WD, Burns HJ, Morrison DS. Effects of multidisciplinary team working on breast cancer survival: retrospective, comparative, interventional cohort study of 13,722 women. BMJ. 2012;344:e2718.PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Leo F, Venissac N, Poudenx M, et al. Multidisciplinary management of lung cancer: how to test its efficacy? J Thorac Oncol. 2007;2:69-72.PubMedCrossRef Leo F, Venissac N, Poudenx M, et al. Multidisciplinary management of lung cancer: how to test its efficacy? J Thorac Oncol. 2007;2:69-72.PubMedCrossRef
20.
go back to reference Stalfors J, Lundberg C, Westin T. Quality assessment of a multidisciplinary tumour meeting for patients with head and neck cancer. Acta Otolaryngol (Stockh). 2007;127:82-7.CrossRef Stalfors J, Lundberg C, Westin T. Quality assessment of a multidisciplinary tumour meeting for patients with head and neck cancer. Acta Otolaryngol (Stockh). 2007;127:82-7.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Lamb B, Wong H, Vincent C, Green JSA, Sevdalis N. Teamwork and team performance in urological multidisciplinary cancer teams: development and evaluation of an observational assessment tool. BMJ Qual Saf. 2011;20:849-56.PubMedCrossRef Lamb B, Wong H, Vincent C, Green JSA, Sevdalis N. Teamwork and team performance in urological multidisciplinary cancer teams: development and evaluation of an observational assessment tool. BMJ Qual Saf. 2011;20:849-56.PubMedCrossRef
22.
go back to reference Lamb BW, Sevdalis N, Mostafid H, Vincent C, Green JSA. Teamwork and clinical decision-making in multidisciplinary cancer teams: prospective multimethod investigation using cross-validated assessment tools. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011;18(13):3535-43.PubMedCrossRef Lamb BW, Sevdalis N, Mostafid H, Vincent C, Green JSA. Teamwork and clinical decision-making in multidisciplinary cancer teams: prospective multimethod investigation using cross-validated assessment tools. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011;18(13):3535-43.PubMedCrossRef
23.
go back to reference Hull L, Arora S, Kassab E, Kneebone RL, Sevdalis N. Observational Teamwork Assessment for Surgery (OTAS): content validation and tool refinement. J Am Coll Surg. 2011;212:234-43.PubMedCrossRef Hull L, Arora S, Kassab E, Kneebone RL, Sevdalis N. Observational Teamwork Assessment for Surgery (OTAS): content validation and tool refinement. J Am Coll Surg. 2011;212:234-43.PubMedCrossRef
24.
go back to reference Sevdalis N, Lyons M, Healey AN, Undre S, Darzi A, Vincent CA. Observational Teamwork Assessment for Surgery: construct validation with expert vs. novice raters. Ann Surg. 2009;249:1047-51.PubMedCrossRef Sevdalis N, Lyons M, Healey AN, Undre S, Darzi A, Vincent CA. Observational Teamwork Assessment for Surgery: construct validation with expert vs. novice raters. Ann Surg. 2009;249:1047-51.PubMedCrossRef
25.
go back to reference Vincent C, Moorthy K, Sarker SK, et al. Systems approaches to surgical quality and safety: from concept to measurement. Ann Surg. 2004;239:475-82.PubMedCrossRef Vincent C, Moorthy K, Sarker SK, et al. Systems approaches to surgical quality and safety: from concept to measurement. Ann Surg. 2004;239:475-82.PubMedCrossRef
26.
go back to reference Undre S, Arora S, Sevdalis N. Surgical performance, human error and patient safety in urological surgery. BJMSU. 2009;2:2-1.CrossRef Undre S, Arora S, Sevdalis N. Surgical performance, human error and patient safety in urological surgery. BJMSU. 2009;2:2-1.CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Department of Health. National Cancer Patient Experience Survey Programme. 2010 National Survey Report. London, UK: Department of Health, 2010. Department of Health. National Cancer Patient Experience Survey Programme. 2010 National Survey Report. London, UK: Department of Health, 2010.
28.
go back to reference Taylor C, Sippitt JM, Collins G, McManus C, Richardson A, Dawson J, Richards M, Ramirez AJ. A pre-post test evaluation of the impact of the PELICAN MDT-TME Development Programme on the working lives of colorectal cancer team members. BMC Health Serv Res. 2010;10:187.PubMedCrossRef Taylor C, Sippitt JM, Collins G, McManus C, Richardson A, Dawson J, Richards M, Ramirez AJ. A pre-post test evaluation of the impact of the PELICAN MDT-TME Development Programme on the working lives of colorectal cancer team members. BMC Health Serv Res. 2010;10:187.PubMedCrossRef
29.
go back to reference Lamb BW, Sevdalis N, Taylor C, Vincent C, Green JS (2012) Multidisciplinary team working across different tumour types: analysis of a national survey. Ann. Oncol. 23(5):1293-300 Epub 2011 Oct 19.PubMedCrossRef Lamb BW, Sevdalis N, Taylor C, Vincent C, Green JS (2012) Multidisciplinary team working across different tumour types: analysis of a national survey. Ann. Oncol. 23(5):1293-300 Epub 2011 Oct 19.PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Multidisciplinary Cancer Team Meeting Structure and Treatment Decisions: A Prospective Correlational Study
Authors
B. W. Lamb
N. Sevdalis
J. Benn
C. Vincent
J. S. A. Green
Publication date
01-03-2013
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Annals of Surgical Oncology / Issue 3/2013
Print ISSN: 1068-9265
Electronic ISSN: 1534-4681
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-012-2691-x

Other articles of this Issue 3/2013

Annals of Surgical Oncology 3/2013 Go to the issue