Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Jun 4:14:1311-1324.
doi: 10.2147/JMDH.S286044. eCollection 2021.

The Next Step Toward Patient-Centeredness in Multidisciplinary Cancer Team Meetings: An Interview Study with Professionals

Affiliations

The Next Step Toward Patient-Centeredness in Multidisciplinary Cancer Team Meetings: An Interview Study with Professionals

Paulus A F Geerts et al. J Multidiscip Healthc. .

Abstract

Background: Patient-centeredness is essential in complex oncological multidisciplinary team decision-making. Improvement seems to be needed, while there is a lack of knowledge about health care providers' needs for improvement.

Objective: To explore multidisciplinary team members' perspectives on the need to improve patient-centeredness in complex decision-making, and subsequently the strategies to enhance it.

Methods: This was a qualitative descriptive interview study. The participants were twenty-four professionals who attended multidisciplinary cancer team meetings weekly. The setting was five multidisciplinary teams (gastrointestinal, gynecological, urological, head and neck, and hematological cancer) in a Dutch academic hospital. Data were collected by semi-structured interviews and were analyzed with a combination of inductive and deductive content analysis.

Results: The participants voiced the need for additional information (patient-centered information, patients's needs and preferences, individualized medical information) during the multidisciplinary team meeting, to be more patient-centered in the decision-making conversation with the patient following the meeting, and for more information following the meeting to support patient-centeredness. The strategies, which mostly originated from the needs, were categorized as organization, decision-making, and communication. The most prominent strategies were those aimed at collecting and using patient-centered information, and to facilitate the decision-making conversation with the patient following the multidisciplinary team meeting.

Conclusion: Our findings highlighted the need to improve patient-centeredness in oncological multidisciplinary teams and provided a comprehensive overview of strategies for improvement, supported by multidisciplinary team members. These strategies emphasize involvement of patients throughout the continuous process of decision-making for patients with cancer. These strategies may be implemented in other oncological multidisciplinary teams, taking in mind the local needs. Future research may help to prioritize the strategies and to determine and evaluate the effect on endpoints, like patient or professional satisfaction, shared decision-making, and on the decision that was made.

Keywords: cancer; decision-making; multidisciplinary team; patient care; patient care team; patient-centered care.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

No competing interests declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Cancer-related decision-making process. At suspicion of malignancy the physician discusses the possible diagnosis and treatment options with the patient (team talk and, if possible, option talk). Patient-centered information is acquired (preference talk) and additional diagnostics are ordered. The treating physician discusses the patient case in the MDT meeting, where an advice is formulated and well-documented. The team aims to align MDT decision-making with Shared Decision-Making with the patient. Then, the physician translates the MDT advice to the patient and integrates this with the patient towards a personalized treatment plan. Options are explained with pros and cons (option talk) and preferences are discussed (preference talk). The treatment is applied. During decision-making or treatment, the MDT may be consulted again, when necessary.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. ASCO and ESMO. ASCO-ESMO consensus statement on quality cancer care. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24(21):3498–3499. doi:10.1200/JCO.2006.07.4021 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Borras JM, Albreht T, Audisio R, et al. Policy statement on multidisciplinary cancer care. Eur J Cancer. 2014;50(3):475–480. doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2013.11.012 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Pillay B, Wootten AC, Crowe H, et al. The impact of multidisciplinary team meetings on patient assessment, management and outcomes in oncology settings: a systematic review of the literature. Cancer Treat Rev. 2016;42:56–72. doi:10.1016/j.ctrv.2015.11.007 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Basta YL, Bolle S, Fockens P, Tytgat K. The value of multidisciplinary team meetings for patients with gastrointestinal malignancies: a systematic review. Ann Surg Oncol. 2017;24(9):2669–2678. doi:10.1245/s10434-017-5833-3 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lamb BW, Brown KF, Nagpal K, Vincent C, Green JS, Sevdalis N. Quality of care management decisions by multidisciplinary cancer teams: a systematic review. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011;18(8):2116–2125. doi:10.1245/s10434-011-1675-6 - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources