Extraordinary virtual multidisciplinary team meetings - a novel forum for the coordinated care of patients with -complex conditions within a secondary care setting

Interdisciplinary Pain Board for Managing Patients with Palliative Care Needs and Substance Use Disorder: A Pilot Study

Context: Patients with cancer-related pain and concurrent substance use disorder (SUD) present a unique set of challenges for palliative care clinicians. A structured forum for interdisciplinary collaboration is needed to effectively manage this complex population. Objectives: Describe the feasibility and acceptability of a palliative care Complex Pain Board (CPB), an interdisciplinary team meeting to provide concrete care recommendations for patients with cancer-related pain and concurrent SUD and/or psychosocial complexity. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of cases presented at CPB between May 2021 and June 2022 and a cross-sectional analysis of CBP participant surveys. Results: Among 28 cases included for analysis, gastrointestinal cancers (n = 7, 25.9%) and multiple myeloma (n = 5, 18.5%) were the most frequent cancer diagnoses. Primary reasons for referral were SUD (n = 22, 78.6%) and provider/team distress (n = 13, 46.4%). The most frequent recommendations made at CBP were encouraging interdisciplinary collaboration (n = 18, 64.3%), maintaining healthy boundaries (n = 15, 53.6%), and SUD management (n = 13, 46.4%). Of 14 scheduled meetings, most meetings involved the presentation of ≥1 cases (n = 12, 86%). Among 40 CBP participant surveys, most attendees (n = 38, 95%) were likely or highly likely to continue to attend. Conclusion: CPB is a feasible and acceptable intervention that allows for palliative care clinicians to collaborate and receive interdisciplinary team feedback and peer support on the management of patients with cancer-related pain and concurrent SUD and/or psychosocial complexity in the ambulatory care setting. Key Message: A regular, interdisciplinary team meeting (CPB) is a feasible and acceptable intervention to help palliative care clinicians manage challenging cases involving patients with cancer and concurrent SUD and/or psychosocial complexity.

Evolution and Effects of Ad Hoc Multidisciplinary Team Meetings in the Emergency Intensive Care Unit: A Five-Year Analysis

Background: Multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTMs) are crucial in the ICU. However, daily rounds may not address all sensitive issues due to time constraints and the complexity of cases. This study aimed to describe detailed information and characteristics of ad hoc MDTMs in the ICU. Methods: This single-center, retrospective study analyzed adult emergency ICU admissions at Okayama University Hospital from 1 January 2019 to 31 December 2023. During this period, weekly regular multidisciplinary team ICU rounds were introduced in June 2020, and regular weekday morning MDTMs began in April 2022. A multiple logistic regression analysis was applied to determine the impact of these changes on the frequency of ad hoc MDTMs, adjusting for variables including annual changes. Results: The study analyzed 2487 adult EICU patients, with a median age of 66, and 63.3% of them male. MDTMs were held for 168 patients (6.8%), typically those with severe conditions, including higher COVID-19 prevalence and APACHE II scores, and longer ICU stays. Despite a constant total number of MDTMs, the likelihood of conducting ad hoc MDTMs increased annually (adjusted OR 1.19; 95% CI, 1.04-1.35). Of the 329 MDTMs conducted for these patients, 59.0% addressed end-of-life care, involving an average of 11 participants, mainly nurses and emergency and critical-care physicians. Conclusions: Changes in ICU round and meeting structures might be associated with a higher frequency of conducting ad hoc MDTMs, highlighting their evolving role and importance in patient care management.

Transforming health care systems towards high-performance organizations: qualitative study based on learning from COVID-19 pandemic in the Basque Country (Spain)

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic is one of the worst health catastrophes of the last century, which caused severe economic, political, and social consequences worldwide. Despite these devastating consequences, lessons learned provide a great opportunity that can drive the reform of health systems to become high-performing, effective, equitable, accessible, and sustainable organisations. This work identifies areas in which changes must be encouraged that will enable health systems to deal effectively with current and future challenges, beyond COVID-19.

METHODS

A realist design was chosen, based on qualitative data collection techniques, content analysis and triangulation to identify key domains of organizational interventions behind the changes implemented to react to the COVID-19 pandemic in the Basque Country. Twenty key informants were used as an expert source of information. Thematic analysis was done using the Framework Method.

RESULTS

The analysis of the interviews resulted in the identification of 116 codes, which were reviewed and agreed upon by the researchers. Following the process of methodological analysis, these codes were grouped into domains: seven themes and 23 sub-themes. Specifically, the themes are: responsiveness, telehealth, integration, knowledge management, professional roles, digitisation, and organisational communication. The detailed description of each theme and subtheme is presented.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this work pretend to guide the transformation of health systems into organisations that can improve the health of their populations and provide high quality care. Such a multidimensional and comprehensive reform encompasses both strategic and operational actions in diverse areas and requires a broad and sustained political, technical, and financial commitment.

Changing from face-to-face to virtual meetings due to the COVID-19 pandemic: protocol for a mixed-methods study exploring the impact on cancer multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings

INTRODUCTION

In the UK, the National Cancer Plan (2000) requires every cancer patient's care to be reviewed by a multidisciplinary team (MDT). Since the introduction of these guidelines, MDTs have faced escalating demands with increasing numbers and complexity of cases. The COVID-19 pandemic has presented MDTs with the challenge of running MDT meetings virtually rather than face-to-face.This study aims to explore how the change from face-to-face to virtual MDT meetings during the COVID-19 pandemic may have impacted the effectiveness of decision-making in cancer MDT meetings and to make recommendations to improve future cancer MDT working based on the findings.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A mixed-methods study with three parallel phases:Semistructured remote qualitative interviews with ≤40 cancer MDT members.A national cross-sectional online survey of cancer MDT members in England, using a validated questionnaire with both multiple-choice and free-text questions.Live observations of ≥6 virtual/hybrid cancer MDT meetings at four NHS Trusts.Participants will be recruited from Cancer Alliances in England. Data collection tools have been developed in consultation with stakeholders, based on a conceptual framework devised from decision-making models and MDT guidelines. Quantitative data will be summarised descriptively, and χ² tests run to explore associations. Qualitative data will be analysed using applied thematic analysis. Using a convergent design, mixed-methods data will be triangulated guided by the conceptual framework.The study has been approved by NHS Research Ethics Committee (London-Hampstead) (22/HRA/0177). The results will be shared through peer-reviewed journals and academic conferences. A report summarising key findings will be used to develop a resource pack for MDTs to translate learnings from this study into improved effectiveness of virtual MDT meetings.The study has been registered on the Open Science Framework (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/D2NHW).

Virtual reality against Zoom fatigue? A field study on the teaching and learning experience in interactive video and VR conferencing

Aim

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the absence of in-person teaching was partially compensated for through videoconferencing. However, lecturers complain that students do not participate actively in video-based online seminars. One reason cited for this is Zoom fatigue. Conferences in virtual reality (VR), accessible with and without head-mounted display, represent one potential remedy to this issue. The research to date does not shed any light on the (1.) teaching experience, (2.) student demand, (3.) learning experience (including participation and social presence), and (4.) learning performance (declarative and spatial) associated with VR conferences. The present work will compare these aspects for videoconferencing, independent study, and - in the case of teaching experience - with in-person teaching.

Methods

A compulsory seminar in General Physiology was offered during the 2020/21 winter semester and the 2021 summer semester as part of the Human Medicine program at the Faculty of Medicine at Ulm University. The seminars were offered in three different formats with identical content: (a) VR conference, (b) video conference, and (c) independent study, with students selecting the format of their choice. In the VR conferences, the lecturer taught using a head-mounted display while students participated via PC, laptop, or tablet. The learning experience and learning performance were assessed using questionnaires and a knowledge test. A semi-structured interview was conducted to assess the VR teaching experience.

Results

The lecturer's teaching experience in the VR conferences was similar to in-person teaching. Students predominantly chose independent study and videoconferencing. The latter resulted in worse outcomes with regard to learning experience (including participation and social presence) and spatial learning performance than the VR conferences. Declarative learning performance differed only slightly between teaching formats.

Conclusions

VR conferencing offers lecturers new didactic opportunities and a teaching experience similar to that of in-person teaching. Students prefer time-efficient videoconferencing and independent study, but rate participation and social presence, among other things, higher in VR conferencing. If faculty and students are open to the technology, VR conferencing can promote interactive exchange in online seminars. This subjective assessment is not associated with better declarative learning performance.

Attitudes and perceptions of radiologists towards online (virtual) oncologic multidisciplinary team meetings during the COVID-19 pandemic-a survey of the European Society of Oncologic Imaging (ESOI)

OBJECTIVES

To explore radiologists' opinions regarding the shift from in-person oncologic multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTMs) to online MDTMs. To assess the perceived impact of online MDTMs, and to evaluate clinical and technical aspects of online meetings.

METHODS

An online questionnaire including 24 questions was e-mailed to all European Society of Oncologic Imaging (ESOI) members. Questions targeted the structure and efficacy of online MDTMs, including benefits and limitations.

RESULTS

A total of 204 radiologists responded to the survey. Responses were evaluated using descriptive statistical analysis. The majority (157/204; 77%) reported a shift to online MDTMs at the start of the pandemic. For the most part, this transition had a positive effect on maintaining and improving attendance. The majority of participants reported that online MDTMs provide the same clinical standard as in-person meetings, and that interdisciplinary discussion and review of imaging data were not hindered. Seventy three of 204 (35.8%) participants favour reverting to in-person MDTs, once safe to do so, while 7/204 (3.4%) prefer a continuation of online MDTMs. The majority (124/204, 60.8%) prefer a combination of physical and online MDTMs.

CONCLUSIONS

Online MDTMs are a viable alternative to in-person meetings enabling continued timely high-quality provision of care with maintained coordination between specialties. They were accepted by the majority of surveyed radiologists who also favoured their continuation after the pandemic, preferably in combination with in-person meetings. An awareness of communication issues particular to online meetings is important. Training, improved software, and availability of support are essential to overcome technical and IT difficulties reported by participants.

KEY POINTS

• Majority of surveyed radiologists reported shift from in-person to online oncologic MDT meetings during the COVID-19 pandemic. • The shift to online MDTMs was feasible and generally accepted by the radiologists surveyed with the majority reporting that online MDTMs provide the same clinical standard as in-person meetings. • Most would favour the return to in-person MDTMs but would also accept the continued use of online MDTMs following the end of the current pandemic.

Physician-led in-hospital multidisciplinary team conferences with multiple medical specialities present - A scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Multidisciplinary Team Conferences (MDTs) are complex interventions in the modern healthcare system and they promote a model of coordinated patient care and management. However, MDTs within chronic diseases are poorly defined. Therefore, the aim of this scoping review was to summarise the current literature on physician-led in-hospital MDTs in chronic non-malignant diseases.

METHOD

Following the PRISMA-ScR guideline for scoping reviews, a search on MDT interventions in adult patients, with three or more medical specialties represented, was performed.

RESULTS

We identified 2790 studies, from which 8 studies were included. The majority of studies were non-randomised and focused on a single disease entity such as infective endocarditis, atrial fibrillation, IgG4-related disease, or arterial and venous thrombosis. The main reason for referral was confirmation or establishment of a diagnosis, and the MDT members were primarily from medical specialties gathered especially for the MDT. Outcomes of the included studies were grouped into process indicators and outcome indicators. Process indicators included changes in diagnostic confirmation as well as therapeutic strategy and management. All studies reporting process indicators demonstrated significant changes before and after the MDT.

CONCLUSION

MDTs within chronic diseases appeared highly heterogeneous with respect to structure, reasons for referral, and choice of outcomes. While process indicators, such as change in diagnosis, and treatment management/plan seem improved, such have not been demonstrated through outcome indicators.

A multidisciplinary neuro-oncological triage panel reduces the time to referral and treatment for patients with a brain tumor

Background

Regional collaboration and appropriate referral management are crucial in neuro-oncological care. Lack of electronic access to medical records across health care organizations impedes interhospital consultation and may lead to incomplete and delayed referrals. To improve referral management, we have established a multidisciplinary neuro-oncological triage panel (NOTP) with digital image exchange and determined the effects on lead times, costs, and time investment.

Methods

A prospective cohort study was conducted from February 2019 to March 2020. All newly diagnosed patients referred to Brain Tumor Center Amsterdam were analyzed according to referral pathway: (1) standard referral (SR), (2) NOTP. The primary outcome was lead time, defined as time-to-referral, time-to-treatment, and total time (median days [interquartile range]). Secondary outcomes were costs and time investment.

Results

In total, 225 patients were included, of whom 153 had SR and 72 NOTP referral. Patients discussed in the NOTP were referred more frequently for first neurosurgical consultation (44.7% vs 28.8%) or combined neurological and neurosurgical consultation (12.8% vs 2.5%, P = .002). Time-to-referral was reduced for NOTP referral compared to SR (1 [0.25-4] vs 6 [1.5-10] days, P < .001). Total time decreased from 27 [14-48] days for the standard group to 15 [12-38.25] days for the NOTP group (P = .040). Costs and time investment were comparable for both groups.

Conclusion

Implementation of digital referral to a multidisciplinary NOTP is feasible and leads to more swift patient-tailored referrals at comparable costs and time investment as SR. This quality improvement initiative has the potential to improve collaboration and coordination of multidisciplinary care in the field of neuro-oncology.

Virtual Multidisciplinary Review of a Complex Case Using a Digital Clinical Decision Support Tool to Improve Workflow Efficiency

Objective

Integration of distinct clinical perspectives in multi-disciplinary tumor board meetings is critical to determine optimal patient care. Digital tools can support the data consolidation needed for meeting preparation and data sharing during complex case reviews. In this paper, we assessed the value of a clinical decision support tool on workflow efficiency and conducting a complex case review of a dermatofibrosarcoma protuberans (DFSP) tumor.

Methods

Case presentation was performed by each unique clinical specialty that had relevant information about the patient; an oncologist, a pathologist, and a radiologist. Virtual discussion was completed online with case presentation and documentation with NAVIFY Tumor Board. Workflow efficiency assessment was done through interviews and observation of the # of steps across different team members involved in preparing and conducting cancer multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings before and after the implementation of the NAVIFY Tumor Board solution.

Results

Case review consisted of surgical and therapeutic intervention history, distinct histological and sequencing patterns representative of DFSP, with radiological review to determine areas for surgical intervention. Consolidation of clinical input led to a recommendation of a formal external hemipelvectomy with potential chemotherapy. Workflow assessment demonstrated a 46% total reduction in the # of steps for meeting preparation (from 69 to 37), with specific changes based on role: data manager (33 to 15), pathologist (26 to 13), radiologist (no change), and logistics (5 to 4). There was a 31% total reduction in the # of steps for conducting the meeting (from 51 to 35).

Conclusion

Utilizing a digital clinical decision support tool helped to consolidate patient data and improved case presentation through workflow efficiency. This allowed for improved interdisciplinary discussion on a complex DFSP case and supported the determination of a clinical decision.

Multidisciplinary Joint Clinics: Talent Wins Games, but Teamwork Wins Championships

Cancer is among the leading causes of deaths worldwide. The treatments of cancer across most sites involve using surgery, systemic therapy, and radiation therapy. The treatment protocols are complex and require careful planning at the beginning of the therapy and coordination between the treating teams, the patient, and the caregivers to ensure compliance and avoid unnecessary treatment delays. This commentary provides an insight into the role the multidisciplinary joint clinics play in providing personalized cancer care. While such joint clinics are advantageous, they are not devoid of drawbacks and these are also enumerated. In this era, when communication platforms are increasingly digitized, we have highlighted the need for virtual tumor boards. The commentary aims to motivate the development of multidisciplinary joint clinics for ensuring holistic cancer care across the country.

How to treat venous thromboembolism (TVE) in cancer patients: ten years of multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTM) at Saint-Louis Hospital

BACKGROUND

- The management of venous thromboembolism (VTE) is particularly challenging in patients with cancer who undergo complex treatment protocols. Cancer patients often have comorbidities which may affect the efficacy and safety of anticoagulant treatments. Coordinated multidisciplinary management of these complex cases can help optimize delivery of individualized anticoagulant treatment.

AIMS

- To describe the multidisciplinary team meeting (MDTM) for the management of VTE in cancer patients at our institution and to document outcomes in these patients.

METHODS

- Bi-monthly MDTMs attended by different physicians and nurses were established at Saint-Louis Hospital in 2008. We performed a retrospective analysis of all cases discussed between September 2008 and January 2018.

RESULTS

- Over a 10-year period, 520 patients were discussed a total of 551 times. Their mean age was 63 years with 278 (53%) women. The most frequent primary cancer sites were breast (23%), genitourinary (21 %), hematological (20%), digestive (15%), and lung (9%). Fifty-two percent of patients had metastatic cancer, and 54% of them were receiving chemotherapy. The optimal treatment for pulmonary embolism (17%), deep vein thrombosis (16%), catheter-related thrombosis (20%) or combined events (46%) was discussed. Twenty-three patients (4.4%) were discussed for one VTE recurrence and 4 (0.8%) for 2 recurrences.

CONCLUSIONS

- A dedicated MDTM for the management of VTE in cancer patients allows to discuss a wide range of clinical scenarios and contributes to optimal adherence to evidence-based clinical practices guidelines. The MDTM evaluation was successfully carried out within a short time-frame of VTE diagnosis and helped optimize individualized treatment plans.

Medical Students' Corner: Lessons From COVID-19 in Equity, Adaptability, and Community for the Future of Medical Education

As UK medical students, we recently completed 3 months of remote learning due to the COVID-19 pandemic, before taking online end-of-the-year exams. We are now entering our final year of medical school. Based on our experiences and our understanding of others' experiences, we believe that three key lessons have been universal for medical students around the world. The lessons learned throughout this process address the need for a fair system for medical students, the importance of adaptability in all aspects of medical education, and the value of a strong medical school community. These lessons can be applied in the years to come to improve medical education as we know it.

Optimization of transmural care by implementation of an online expert panel to assess treatment strategy in patients suffering from colorectal cancer liver metastases: A prospective analysis

INTRODUCTION

Centralization of oncological care results in a growing demand for specialized consultations and referrals. Improved telemedicine solutions are needed to facilitate access to specialist care and select patients eligible for referral. The purpose of this quality improvement initiative was to optimize transmural care for patients suffering from colorectal cancer liver metastases through implementation of an online expert panel.

METHODS

A digital communication platform was developed to share medical data, including high-quality diagnostic imaging of patients suffering from colorectal cancer liver metastases. Feasibility of local treatment strategies was assessed by a panel of liver specialists to select patients for referral. After implementation, an observational cohort study was conducted to evaluate quality improvement in transmural care using revised Standards for Quality Improvement Reporting Excellence guidelines.

RESULTS

From September 2016-September 2018, eight hospitals were connected to the platform, covering a population of 3 m. In total, 123 cases were assessed, of which 54 (43.9%) were prevented from needless physical referral. Assessment of treatment strategy by an online expert panel significantly reduced the average lead time during multidisciplinary team meetings from 3.73 min to 2.12 min per patient (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of an online expert panel is an innovative, accessible and user-friendly way to provide cancer-specific expertise to regional hospitals. E-consultation of such panels may result in more efficient multidisciplinary team meetings and prevent fragile patients from needless referral. Sustainability of these panels however is subject to structural financial compensation, so a cost-effectiveness analysis is warranted.

Using virtual worlds as a platform for collaborative meetings in healthcare: a feasibility study

BACKGROUND

Healthcare teams often consist of geographically dispersed members. Virtual worlds can support immersive, high-quality, multimedia interaction between remote individuals; this study investigated use of virtual worlds to support remote healthcare quality improvement team meetings.

METHODS

Twenty individuals (12 female, aged 25-67 [M = 42.3, SD = 11.8]) from 6 healthcare quality improvement teams conducted collaborative tasks in virtual world or face-to-face settings. Quality of collaborative task performances were measured and questionnaires and interviews were used to record participants' experiences of conducting the tasks and using the virtual world software.

RESULTS

Quality of collaborative task outcomes was high in both face-to-face and virtual world settings. Participant interviews elicited advantages for using virtual worlds in healthcare settings, including the ability of the virtual environment to support tools that cannot be represented in equivalent face-to-face meetings, and the potential for virtual world settings to cause improvements in group-dynamics. Reported disadvantages for future virtual world use in healthcare included the difficulty that people with weaker computer skills may experience with using the software. Participants tended to feel absorbed in the collaborative task they conducted within the virtual world, but did not experience the virtual environment as being 'real'.

CONCLUSIONS

Virtual worlds can provide an effective platform for collaborative meetings in healthcare quality improvement, but provision of support to those with weaker computer skills should be ensured, as should the technical reliability of the virtual world being used. Future research could investigate use of virtual worlds in other healthcare settings.