“No decision about me without me” in the context of cancer multidisciplinary team meetings: a qualitative interview study

BMC Health Services Research

James SA Green³  Jennifer Finnegan-John²  Cath Taylor¹ 

[1] Florence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing & Midwifery, Kings College London, London, UK;Breast Cancer Care, 5-13 Great Suffolk Street, London, UK;BartsHealth NHS Trust, Whipps Cross University Hospital, London, UK

关键词: Interviews;    Qualitative;    Patient-centredness;    Clinical decision-making;    Multi-disciplinary team;    Cancer;   

Others  :  1118295
DOI  :  10.1186/s12913-014-0488-2

 received in 2014-04-01, accepted in 2014-10-03,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

Cancer care is commonly managed by multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) who meet to discuss and agree treatment for individual patients. Patients do not attend MDT meetings but recommendations for treatments made in the meetings directly influence the decision-making process between patients and their responsible clinician. No research to-date has considered patient perspectives (or understanding) regarding MDTs or MDT meetings, though research has shown that failure to consider patient-based information can lead to recommendations that are inappropriate or unacceptable, and can consequently delay treatment.

Methods

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with current cancer patients from one cancer centre who had either upper gastrointestinal or gynaecological cancer (n = 9) and with MDT members (n = 12) from the teams managing their care. Interview transcripts were analysed thematically using Framework approach. Key themes were identified and commonalities and discrepancies within and between individual transcripts and within and between patient and team member samples were identified and examined using the constant comparative method.

Results

Patients had limited opportunities to input to or influence the decision-making process in MDT meetings. Key explanatory factors included that patients were given limited and inconsistent information about MDTs and MDT meetings, and that MDT members had variable definitions of patient-centredness in the context of MDTs and MDT meetings. Patients that had knowledge of medicine (through current/previous employment themselves or that of a close family member) appeared to have greater understanding and access to the MDT. Reassurance emerged as a ‘benefit’ of informing patients about MDTs and MDT meetings.

Conclusions

There is a need to ensure MDT processes are both efficient and patient-centred. The operationalization of “No decision about me without me” in the context of MDT models of care – where patients are not present when recommendations for treatment are discussed - requires further consideration. Methods for ensuring that patients are actively integrated into the MDT processes are required to ensure patients have an informed choice regarding engagement, and to ensure recommendations are based on the best available patient-based and clinical evidence.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Taylor et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Mcnair AGK, Choh CT, Metcalfe C, Littlejohns D, Barham CP, Hollowood AD, Falk S, Blazeby JM: Maximising recruitment into randomised controlled trials: The role of multidisciplinary cancer teams. Eur J Cancer 2008, 44(17):2623-2626.
• [2]Taylor C, Shewbridge A, Harris J, Green JA: Benefits of multidisciplinary teamwork in the management of breast cancer. Breast Cancer: Targets and Therapy 2013, 5:79-85.
• [3]Taylor C, Munro AJ, Glynne-Jones R, Griffin C, Trevatt P, Richards M, Ramirez AJ: Multidisciplinary team working in cancer: What is the evidence? Br Med J 2010, 340:c951.
• [4]Kesson EM, Allardice GM, George WD, Burns HJG, Morrison DS: Effects of multidisciplinary team working on breast cancer survival: Retrospective, comparative, interventional cohort study of 13 722 women. Br Med J 2012, 344:e2718.
• [5]Hong NJL, 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):125-134.
• [6]Liberating the NHS: No decisions about me, without me. Government response ᅟ ᅟ, ᅟ:ᅟ. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/216980/Liberating-the-NHS-No-decision-about-me-without-me-Government-response.pdf
• [7]Coulter A, Collins A: Making Shared Decision-Making a Reality: no Decision About me Without me. The Kings Fund, London; 2011.
• [8]O’Connor A, Bennett C, Stacey D, Barry M, Col N, Eden K, Entwistle V, Fiset V, Holmes-Rovner M, Khangura S, Llewellyn-Thomas H, Rovner D: Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009, 3:CD001431.
• [9]Griffin SJ, Kinmonth AL, Veltman MWM, Gillard S, Grant J: Effect on health-related outcomes of interventions to alter the interaction between patients and practitioners: A systematic review of trials. Ann Fam Med 2004, 1(2):595-608.
• [10]Stewart MA: Effective physician-patient communication and health outcomes: a review. Can Med Assoc J 1995, 152(9):1423-1433.
• [11]Helping people share decision making ᅟ 2012, ᅟ:ᅟ. http://www.health.org.uk/public/cms/75/76/313/3448/HelpingPeopleShareDecisionMaking.pdf?realName=Nq1TuP.pdf
• [12]Mulley A, Trimble C, Elwyn G: Patients’ Preferences Matter, Stop the Silent Misdiagnosis. The Kings Fund, London; 2012.
• [13]Pieterse AH, Baas-Thijssen MCM, Marjnen CAM, Stiggelbout AM: Clinician and cancer patient views on patient participation in treatment decision-making: a quantitative and qualitative exploration. Br J Cancer 2008, 99(6):875-882.
• [14]Levinson W, Kao A, Kuby A, Thisted RA: Not All patients want to participate in decision making- a national study of public preferences. J Gen Intern Med 2005, 20(6):531-535.
• [15]Cancer patient experience survey 2011/12 national report ᅟ ᅟ, ᅟ:ᅟ. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/212860/Cancer-Patient-Experience-Survey-National-Report-2011-12.pdf
• [16]Lamb BW, Brown KF, Nagpal K, Vincent C, Green JSA, Sevdalis N: Quality of care management decisions by multidisciplinary cancer teams: a systematic review. Ann Surg Onc 2011, 18:2116-2125.
• [17]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, 17:457-460.
• [18]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. Color Dis 2008, 8:769-772.
• [19]Kidger J, Murdoch J, Donovan JL, Blazeby JM: Clinical decision-making in a multidisciplinary gynaecological cancer team: a qualitative study. BJOG 2008, 116(4):511-517.
• [20]Lanceley A, Savage J, Menon U, Jacobs I: Influences on multidisciplinary team decision-making. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2008, 18(2):215-222.
• [21]National cancer patient experience survey programme - 2010: national survey report ᅟ ᅟ, ᅟ:ᅟ. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-cancer-patient-experience-survey-programme-2010-national-survey-report
• [22]Qualitative Research Practice: A Guide for Social Science Students and Researchers. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA; 2003.
• [23]Thompson AGH: The meaning of patient involvement and participation in health care consultations: a taxonomy. Soc Sci Med 2007, 64(6):1297-1310.
• [24]Redfern M, Keeling JW, Powell E: The Royal Liverpool Children's Inquiry Report (The Redfern Report). The Stationery Office, London; 2001.
• [25]Francis R: Report of the Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust Public Enquiry. The Stationery Office, London; 2013.
• [26]Coulter A: After Bristol: putting patients at the centre. Br Med J 2002, 324:648-651.
• [27]Taylor C, Ramirez AJ: Multidisciplinary Team members' Views About MDT Working: Results from a Survey Commissioned by the National Cancer Action Team. National Cancer Action Team, ᅟ; 2009.
• [28]Taylor C, Atkins L, Richardson A, Tarrant R, Ramirez AJ: Measuring the quality of MDT working: an observational approach. BMC Cancer 2012, 12:202. doi:10.1186/1471-2407-12-202 BioMed Central Full Text
• [29]Holistic Needs Assessment for People With Cancer: A Practical Guide for Healthcare Professionals. National Cancer Action Team, London; ᅟ.
• [30]Lamb BW, Taylor C, Lamb JN, Strickland SL, Vincent C, Green JSA, Sevdalis N: Facilitators, barriers and patient centeredness in multidisciplinary cancer teams. Ann Surg Oncol 2013, 20(5):1408-1416.
• [31]Lamb BW, Wong HW, Vincent C, Green JSA, Sevdalis N: Teamwork and team performance in multidisciplinary cancer teams: development and evaluation of an observational assessment tool. BMJ Qual Saf 2011, 20(10):849-856.
• [32]Bate SP, Robert G: Experience-based design: from redesigning the system around the patient to co-designing services with the patient. Qual Health Care 2006, 15:307-331.
• [33]Taylor KL, Williams RM, Davies K, Luta G, Penek S, Barry S, Kelly S, Tomko C, Schwartz M, Krist AH, Woolf SH, Fishman MB, Cole C, Miller E: Decision making in prostate cancer screening using decision aids vs usual care. A randomized clinical trial. JAMA Intern Med 2013, 173(18):1704-1712.
• [34]The Characteristics of an Effective MDT. NCAT, London; 2011.
• [35]Lamb BW, Jalil R, Shah S, Brown K, Allchorne P, Vincent C, Sevdalis N, Green JSA: Cancer patients’ perspectives on multidisciplinary team working: an exploratory focus group study. Urol Nurs 2014, 32(2):83-91.