Quality improvement in multidisciplinary cancer teams: an investigation of teamwork and clinical decision-making and cross-validation of assessments.

Lamb, B; Sevdalis, N; Mostafid, H; Vincent, C; Green, J

Neuroscience & Neuroimaging Research Collection

Journal article

Quality improvement in multidisciplinary cancer teams: an investigation of teamwork and clinical decision-making and cross-validation of assessments.

Abstract:: PURPOSE: Teamworking and clinical decision-making are important in multidisciplinary cancer teams (MDTs). Our objective is to assess the quality of information presentation and MDT members' contribution to decision-making via expert observation and self-report, aiming to cross-validate the two methods and assess the insight of MDT members into their own team performance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Behaviors were scored using (i) a validated observational tool employing Likert scales with objective anchors, and (ii) a 29-question online self-report tool. Data were collected from observation of 164 cases in five MDTs, and 47 surveys from MDT members (response rate 70%). Presentation of information (case history, radiological, pathological, comorbidities, psychosocial, and patients' views) and quality of contribution to decision-making of MDT members (surgeons, oncologists, radiologists, pathologists, nurses, and MDT coordinators) were analyzed via descriptive statistics and the Jonckheere-Terpstra test. Correlation between observational and self-report assessments was assessed with Spearman's correlations. RESULTS: Quality of information presentation: Case histories and radiology information rated highest; patients' views and comorbidities/psychosocial issues rated lowest (observed: Z = 14.80, P ≤ 0.001; self-report: Z = 3.70, P < 0.001). Contribution to decision-making: Surgeons and oncologists rated highest, nurses and MDT coordinators rated lowest, and others in between (observed: Z = 20.00, P ≤ 0.001; self-report: Z = 8.10, P < 0.001). Correlations between observational and self-report assessments: Median Spearman's rho = 0.74 (range = 0.66-0.91; P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The quality of teamworking and clinical decision-making in MDTs can reliably be assessed using observational and self-report metrics. MDT members have good insight into their own team performance. Such robust assessment methods could provide the basis of a toolkit for MDT team evaluation and improvement.

Actions

Email

Email this record

Send the bibliographic details of this record to your email address.

Your Email
Please enter the email address that the record information will be sent to.

-
Your message (optional)
Please add any additional information to be included within the email.
Share
Cite

Cite this record

APA Style

Lamb, B., Sevdalis, N., Mostafid, H., Vincent, C., & Green, J. (2011). Quality improvement in multidisciplinary cancer teams: an investigation of teamwork and clinical decision-making and cross-validation of assessments. Annals of Surgical Oncology, 18(13), 3535–3543.

MLA Style

Lamb, B, et al. “Quality Improvement in Multidisciplinary Cancer Teams: an Investigation of Teamwork and Clinical Decision-Making and Cross-Validation of Assessments.” Annals of Surgical Oncology, vol. 18, no. 13, 2011, pp. 3535–43.

Chicago Style

Lamb, B, N Sevdalis, H Mostafid, C Vincent, and J Green. 2011. “Quality Improvement in Multidisciplinary Cancer Teams: an Investigation of Teamwork and Clinical Decision-Making and Cross-Validation of Assessments.” Annals of Surgical Oncology 18 (13): 3535–43.
Print