Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Quality of Care Management Decisions by Multidisciplinary Cancer Teams: A Systematic Review

  • Healthcare Policy and Outcomes
  • Published:
Annals of Surgical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Factors that affect the quality of clinical decisions of multidisciplinary cancer teams (MDTs) are not well understood. We reviewed and synthesised the evidence on clinical, social and technological factors that affect the quality of MDT clinical decision-making.

Methods

Electronic databases were searched in May 2009. Eligible studies reported original data, quantitative or qualitative. Data were extracted and tabulated by two blinded reviewers, and study quality formally evaluated.

Results

Thirty-seven studies were included. Study quality was low to medium. Studies assessed quality of care decisions via the effect of MDTs on care management. MDTs changed cancer management by individual physicians in 2–52% of cases. Failure to reach a decision at MDT discussion was found in 27–52% of cases. Decisions could not be implemented in 1–16% of cases. Team decisions are made by physicians, using clinical information. Nursing personnel do not have an active role, and patient preferences are not discussed. Time pressure, excessive caseload, low attendance, poor teamworking and lack of leadership lead to lack of information and deterioration of decision-making. Telemedicine is increasingly used in developed countries, with no detriment to quality of MDT decisions.

Conclusions

Team/social factors affect management decisions by cancer MDTs. Inclusion of time to prepare for MDTs into team-members’ job plans, making team and leadership skills training available to team-members, and systematic input from nursing personnel would address some of the current shortcomings. These improvements ought to be considered at national policy level, with the ultimate aim of improving cancer care.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Katz MH, Wang H, Fleming JB, et al. Long-term survival after multidisciplinary management of resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16(4):836–47.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Dozois EJ, Wall JC, Spinner RJ, et al. Neurogenic tumors of the pelvis: clinicopathologic features and surgical outcomes using a multidisciplinary team. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16(4):1010–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Manganoni AM, Farisoglio C, Ferrari V, et al. Multidisciplinary team-working indicators of good practice in the clinical management of EGFR-inhibitor dermatologic toxicities. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16(1):224–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Wright FC, Lookhong N, Urbach D, Davis D, McLeod RS, Gagliardi AR. Multidisciplinary cancer conferences: identifying opportunities to promote implementation. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16(10):2731–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Manual for Cancer Services 2004. London: Department of Health; 2004.

  6. Fleissig AJ, Jenkins V, Catt S, Fallowfield L. Multidisciplinary teams in cancer care: are they effective in the UK? Lancet Oncol. 2006;7(11).

  7. Arora S, Ashrafian H, Davis RE, Athanasiou T, Darzi A, Sevdalis N. Emotional intelligence in medicine: a systematic review through the context of the ACGME competencies. Med Educ. 2010;44(8):749–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Davies AR, Deans DA, Penman I, et al. The multidisciplinary team meeting improves staging accuracy and treatment selection for gastro-esophageal cancer. Dis Esophagus. 2006;19(6):496–503.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Penel N, Grosjean J, Pichon-Watelle F, et al. Factors favouring palliative treatment multidisciplinary decisions for newly diagnosed visceral and soft tissue sarcomas. Clin Oncol. 2008;20:523–7.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Butow P, Harrison JD, Choy ET, Young JM, Spillane A, Evans A. Health professional and consumer views on involving breast cancer patients in the multidisciplinary discussion of their disease and treatment plan. Cancer. 2007;110(9):1937–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Ganesan P, Kumar L, Hariprasad R, Gupta A, Dawar R, Vijayaraghavan M. Improving care in ovarian cancer: The role of a clinico-pathological meeting. Natl Med J India. 2008;21(5): 225–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Junnola T, Eriksson E, Salantera S, Lauri S. Nurses’ decision-making in collecting information for the assessment of patients’ nursing problems. J Clin Nurs. 2002;11(2):186–96.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kunkler IH, Prescott RJ, Lee RJ, et al. TELEMAM: A cluster randomised trial to assess the use of telemedicine in multi-disciplinary breast cancer decision making. Eur J Cancer. 2007;43(17):2506–14.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Kee F, Owen T, Leathem R. Offering a prognosis in lung cancer: When is a team of experts an expert team? J Epidemiol Community Health. 2007;61(4):308–13.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Gatcliffe TA, Coleman RL. Tumor board: more than treatment planning—a 1-year prospective survey. J Cancer Educ. 2008;23(4):235–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Acher PL, Young AJ, Etherington-Foy R, McCahy PJ, Deane AM. Improving outcomes in urological cancers: The impact of “multidisciplinary team meetings”. Int J Surg. 2005;3(2):121–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Chang JH, Vines E, Bertsch H, Fraker DL, Czerniecki BJ, Rosato EF, Lawton T, et al. The impact of a multidisciplinary breast cancer center on recommendations for patient management: the University of Pennsylvania experience. Cancer. 2001;91(7):1231–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Kidger J, Murdoch J, Donovan JL, Blazeby JM. Clinical decision-making in a multidisciplinary gynaecological cancer team: a qualitative study. BJOG. 2009;116(4):511–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Amir Z, Scully J, Borrill C. The professional role of breast cancer nurses in multi-disciplinary breast cancer care teams. Eur J Oncol Nurs. 2004;8(4):306–14.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Lanceley A, Savage J, Menon U, Jacobs I. Influences on multidisciplinary team decision-making. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2008;18(2):215–22.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Random.org- True random number generator. http://www.random.org/. Accessed June 30, 2009.

  22. Brown KF, Long SL, Athanasiou T, Vincent CA, Kroll JS, Sevdalis N. Reviewing methodologically disparate data: a practical guide to the patient safety research field. J Eval Clin Pract.

  23. Arora S, Sevdalis N, Nestel D, Woloshynowych M, Darzi A, Kneebone RL. The impact of stress on surgical performance: a systematic review of the literature. Surgery. 2010;147:318–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Kogan JR, Holmboe ES, Hauer Ke. Tools for direct observation and assessment of clinical skills of medical trainees. JAMA. 2009;302:1316–26.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Boonyasai RT, Windish DM, Chakraborti C, Feldman LS, Rubin HR, Bass EB. Effectiveness of teaching quality improvement to clinicians. JAMA. 2007;298:1023–37.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Blazeby JM, Wilson L, Metcalfe C, Nicklin J, English R, Donovan JL. Analysis of clinical decision-making in multi-disciplinary cancer teams. Ann Oncol. 2006;17(3):457–60.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Clarke MG, Wilson JR, Kennedy KP, MacDonagh RP. Clinical judgment analysis of the parameters used by consultant urologists in the management of prostate cancer. J Urol. 2007;178(1):98–102.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Davison AG, Eraut CD, Haque AS, Doffman S, Tanqueray A, Trask CW, Lamont A, et al. Telemedicine for multidisciplinary lung cancer meetings. J Telemed Telecare. 2004;10(3):140–3.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Fielding RG, Macnab M, Swann S, Kunkler IH, Brebner J, Prescott RJ, et al. Attitudes of breast cancer professionals to conventional and telemedicine-delivered multidisciplinary breast meetings. J Telemed Telecare. 2005;11(Suppl 2):S29–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. 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(9):977–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Haward R, Amir Z, Borrill C, Dawson J, Scully J, West M, et al. Breast cancer teams: the impact of constitution, new cancer workload, and methods of operation on their effectiveness. Br J Cancer. 2003;89(1):15–22.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. 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.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Kelly MJ, Lloyd TD, Marshall D, Garcea G, Sutton CD, Beach M. A snapshot of MDT working and patient mapping in the UK colorectal cancer centres in 2002. Colorectal Dis. 2003;5(6):577–81.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Kunkler I, Fielding G, Macnab M, Swann S, Brebner J, Prescott R, et al. Group dynamics in telemedicine-delivered and standard multidisciplinary team meetings: Results from the TELEMAM randomised trial. J Telemed Telecare. 2006;12(Suppl 3):55–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Macaskill EJ, Thrush S, Walker EM, Dixon JM. Surgeons’ views on multi-disciplinary breast meetings. Eur J Cancer. 2006;42(7):905–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Soukop M, Robinson A, Soukop D, Ingham-Clark CL, Kelly MJ. Results of a survey of the role of multidisciplinary team coordinators for colorectal cancer in England and Wales. Colorectal Dis. 2007;9(2):146–50.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Wilson J, Kennedy K, Ewings P, Macdonagh R. Analysis of consultant decision-making in the management of prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2008;11(3):288–93.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Wood JJ, Metcalfe C, Paes A, Sylvester P, Durdey P, Thomas MG, Blazeby JM. An evaluation of treatment decisions at a colorectal cancer multi-disciplinary team. Colorectal Dis. 2008;10(8):769–72.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Leo F, Venissac N, Poudenx M, Otto J, Mouroux J; Groupe d’Oncologie. Multidisciplinary management of lung cancer: how to test its efficacy? J Thorac Oncol. 2007;2(1):69–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Penel N, Valentin F, Giscard S, Vanseymortier L, Beuscart R. General practitioners assessment of a structured report on medical decision making by a regional multidisciplinary cancer committee. Bull Cancer. 2007;94(10):E23–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Seroussi B, Bouaud J, Gligorov J, Uzan S. Supporting multidisciplinary staff meetings for guideline-based breast cancer management: a study with OncoDoc2. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2007:656–60.

  42. Newman EA, Guest AB, Helvie MA, Roubidoux MA, Chang AE, Kleer CG, Diehl KM, et al. Changes in surgical management resulting from case review at a breast cancer multidisciplinary tumor board. Cancer. 2006;107(10):2346–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Delaney G, Jacob S, Iedema R, Winters M, Barton M. Comparison of face-to-face and videoconferenced multidisciplinary clinical meetings. Australas Radiol. 2004;48(4):487–92.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Sidhom M, Poulsen M. Group decisions in oncology: Doctors’ perceptions of the legal responsibilities arising from multidisciplinary meetings. J Med Imag Radiat Oncol. 2008;52(3):287–92.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Bumm R, Feith M, Lordick F, Herschbach P, and Siewert JR. Impact of multidisciplinary tumor boards on diagnosis and treatment of esophageal cancer. Eur Surg Acta Chirurg Austriaca. 2007;39(3):136–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Lutterbach J, Pagenstecher A, Spreer J, Hetzel A, Velthoven V, Nikkhah G, Frommhold H, et al. The brain tumor board: lessons to be learned from an interdisciplinary conference. Onkologie. 2005;28(1):22–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Epstein RL, Leung TW, Mak J, Cheung PS. Utility of a web-based breast cancer predictive algorithm for adjuvant chemotherapeutic decision making in a multidisciplinary oncology center. Cancer Invest. 2006;24(4):367–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Langenhoff BS, Krabbe PF, Ruers TJ. Computer-based decision making in medicine: A model for surgery of colorectal liver metastases. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2007;33(suppl. 2):S111–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. 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(1):82–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Kim MM, Barnato AE, Angus DC, Fleisher LA, Kahn JM. The effect of multidisciplinary care teams on intensive care unit mortality. Arch Intern Med. 2010;170(4):369–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Morey JC, Simon R, Jay GD, et al. Error reduction and performance improvement in the emergency department through formal teamwork training: evaluation results of the MedTeams project. Health Serv Res. 2002;37(6):1553–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Mitchell GK, Brown RM, Erikssen L, Tieman JJ. Multidisciplinary care planning in the primary care management of completed stroke: a systematic review. BMC Fam Pract. 2008;9:44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. McAlister FA, Stewart S, Ferrua S, McMurray JJ. Multidisciplinary strategies for the management of heart failure patients at high risk for admission: a systematic review of randomized trials. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;44(4):810–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Merién AE, van de Ven J, Mol BW, Houterman S, Oei SG. Multidisciplinary team training in a simulation setting for acute obstetric emergencies: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;115(5):1021–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Kunzle B, Kolbe M, Grote G. Ensuring patient safety through effective leadership behaviour: a literature review. Safety Sci. 2010;48:1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Multidisciplinary Team Members Views About MDT Working. Results from a survey commissioned by the National Cancer Action Team. London: NHS National Cancer Action Team; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Lamb BW, Payne H, Vincent C, et al. The role of oncologists in multidisciplinary cancer teams in the UK: an untapped resource for team leadership? J Eval Clin Pract. 2010 Jul 27. [Epub ahead of print].

  58. Lamb B, Sevdalis N. How do nurses make decisions? Int J Nurs Stud. 2010. doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2010.10.003 .

  59. Educational Initiatives to Improve the Effectiveness of Cancer Multidisciplinary Teams. London: Academy of Medical Royal Colleges; 2009.

  60. Lamb BW, Green JSA, Vincent C, et al. Decision-making in surgical oncology. Surg Oncol. (2010). doi:10.1016/j.suronc.2010.07.007.

  61. 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(2):125–34. Review.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

This work was supported by the National Institute for Health Research through the Imperial Centre for Patient Safety and Service Quality and Whipps Cross University Hospital NHS Trust R&D Department. The funding source played no role in study design, collection, analysis or interpretation of data, in the writing of the report or the decision to submit the paper for publication. The corresponding author had full access to all data in the study and had final responsibility for the decision to submit for publication.

Conflicts of interest

The authors report no conflicts of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Benjamin W. Lamb MRCS.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOC 73 kb)

Supplementary material 2 (DOC 111 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lamb, B.W., Brown, K.F., Nagpal, K. et al. Quality of Care Management Decisions by Multidisciplinary Cancer Teams: A Systematic Review. Ann Surg Oncol 18, 2116–2125 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-011-1675-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-011-1675-6

Keywords

Navigation