King's College London

Research portal

Measuring the quality of MDT working: an observational approach

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Cath Taylor, Louise Atkins, Alison Richardson, Ruth Tarrant, Amanda-Jane Ramirez

Original languageEnglish
Article number202
Pages (from-to)1-10
Number of pages10
JournalBMC Cancer
Volume12
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 29 May 2012

King's Authors

Abstract

Background: Cancer multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) are established in many countries but little is known about how well they function. A core activity is regular MDT meetings (MDMs) where treatment recommendations are agreed. A mixed methods descriptive study was conducted to develop and test quality criteria for observational assessment of MDM performance calibrated against consensus from over 2000 MDT members about the "characteristics of an effective MDT".

Methods: Eighteen of the 86 'Characteristics of Effective MDTs' were considered relevant and feasible to observe. They collated to 15 aspects of MDT working covering four domains: the team (e. g. attendance, chairing, teamworking); infrastructure for meetings (venue, equipment); meeting organisation and logistics; and patient-centred clinical decision-making (patient-centredness, clarity of recommendations). Criteria for rating each characteristic from 'very poor' to 'very good' were derived from literature review, observing MDMs and expert input. Criteria were applied to 10 bowel cancer MDTs to assess acceptability and measure variation between and within teams. Feasibility and inter-rater reliability was assessed by comparing three observers.

Results: Observational assessment was acceptable to teams and feasible to implement. Total scores from 29 to 50 (out of 58) highlighted wide diversity in quality between teams. Eight teams were rated either 'very good/good' or 'very poor/poor' for at least three domains demonstrating some internal consistency. 'Very good' ratings were most likely for attendance and administrative preparation, and least likely for patient-centredness of decision-making and prioritisation of complex cases. All except two characteristics had intra-class correlations of >= 0.50.

Conclusions: This observational tool (MDT-OARS) may contribute to the assessment of MDT performance. Further testing to confirm validity and reliability is required.

View graph of relations

© 2018 King's College London | Strand | London WC2R 2LS | England | United Kingdom | Tel +44 (0)20 7836 5454