19
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Improving outcomes in lung cancer: the value of the multidisciplinary health care team

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Lung cancer is a major worldwide health burden, with high disease-related morbidity and mortality. Unlike other major cancers, there has been little improvement in lung cancer outcomes over the past few decades, and survival remains disturbingly low. Multidisciplinary care is the cornerstone of lung cancer treatment in the developed world, despite a relative lack of evidence that this model of care improves outcomes. In this article, the available literature concerning the impact of multidisciplinary care on key measures of lung cancer outcomes is reviewed. This includes the limited observational data supporting improved survival with multidisciplinary care. The impact of multidisciplinary care on other benchmark measures of quality lung cancer treatment is also examined, including staging accuracy, access to diagnostic investigations, improvements in clinical decision making, better utilization of radiotherapy and palliative care services, and improved quality of life for patients. Health service research suggests that multidisciplinary care improves care coordination, leading to a better patient experience, and reduces variation in care, a problem in lung cancer management that has been identified worldwide. Furthermore, evidence suggests that the multidisciplinary model of care overcomes barriers to treatment, promotes standardized treatment through adherence to guidelines, and allows audit of clinical services and for these reasons is more likely to provide quality care for lung cancer patients. While there is strengthening evidence suggesting that the multidisciplinary model of care contributes to improvements in lung cancer outcomes, more quality studies are needed.

          Related collections

          Most cited references48

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Quality of care management decisions by multidisciplinary cancer teams: a systematic review.

          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. 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. 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. 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.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Multidisciplinary teams in cancer care: are they effective in the UK?

            Cancer care can be complex, and given the wide range and numbers of health-care professionals involved, an enormous potential for poor coordination and miscommunication exists. Multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) should improve coordination, communication, and decision making between health-care team members and patients, and hopefully produce more positive outcomes. This review describes the many practical barriers to the successful implementation of MDT working, and shows that despite an increase in the delivery of cancer services via this method, research showing the effectiveness of MDT working is scarce.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Delays in the diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer.

              This study was undertaken to measure delays of diagnosis and to assess the causes for those delays in patients with lung cancer. In addition, the relation of delay times and survival was analyzed. A retrospective study based on patient records. Dates for symptoms, visits to doctors, investigations, treatment, and death were recorded. Patients who were found to have lung cancer at Turku University Hospital, Finland, during 2001. Records of 132 patients were reexamined. The median delay in patient presentation from first symptoms to first appointment with a general practitioner (GP) was 14 days. The median delay by the GP before writing a referral was 16 days, the median referral delay was 8 days, the median delay from the first visit to a specialist until the diagnosis was 15 days, and the median treatment delay was also 15 days. Thirty percent of patients received treatment within 1 month from the first hospital visit, and 61% received treatment within 2 months. The median symptom-to-treatment delay was almost 4 months. The delay in seeing a specialist was shorter in patients with advanced cancer and small cell lung cancer. About half of our patients fulfilled the criteria of the British Thoracic Society recommendations. A longer specialist treatment delay seemed to correlate with better survival in advanced disease, but it was not an independent significant factor for survival. Several reasons for long delays were found, but on many occasions patients underwent numerous consecutive procedures before a diagnosis of cancer was confirmed. Shortening the diagnostic and treatment delay times might be possible with little extra cost by a multidisciplinary team approach and by rapid access to carefully planned investigations, but decreasing the patient delay might be more difficult. This study shows that long specialist treatment delays are not correlated with worse prognosis in patients with advanced disease. In patients with more limited disease, the delay time may be more critical, and if curative treatment is the goal, the diagnostic process should proceed without needless delay to avoid a situation in which curable disease becomes incurable.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Multidiscip Healthc
                J Multidiscip Healthc
                Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare
                Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare
                Dove Medical Press
                1178-2390
                2016
                30 March 2016
                : 9
                : 137-144
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Allergy, Immunology and Respiratory Department, Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
                [2 ]Department of Respiratory and Sleep Medicine, St Vincent’s Hospital, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Eve Denton, Allergy, Immunology and Respiratory Department, Alfred Hospital, PO Box 315, Prahran, Melbourne, VIC 3181, Australia, Tel +61 3 9076 2000, Fax +61 3 9076 3601, Email Eve.denton@ 123456gmail.com
                Article
                jmdh-9-137
                10.2147/JMDH.S76762
                4820200
                27099511
                7adb0bb7-66c0-455c-93af-01d12759c0c0
                © 2016 Denton and Conron. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited

                The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed.

                History
                Categories
                Review

                Medicine
                lung cancer,multidisciplinary care,mortality,tumor board,quality of life
                Medicine
                lung cancer, multidisciplinary care, mortality, tumor board, quality of life

                Comments

                Comment on this article