Dataset Information

Defining the optimal design of the inflammatory bowel disease multidisciplinary team: results from a multicentre qualitative expert-based study.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:To elicit expert views to define the aims, optimal design, format and function of an inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) multidisciplinary team (MDT) with the overall purpose of enhancing the quality of MDT-driven care within an IBD service provision. DESIGN:This study was a multicentre, prospective, qualitative study using a standard semistructured interview methodology. PARTICIPANTS:A multidisciplinary sample of 28 semistructured interviews of which there are six consultant colorectal surgeons, six IBD nurse specialists, seven consultant gastroenterologists, five consultant radiologists and four consultant histopathologists. SETTING:Participants were recruited from 10 hospitals, which were a mixture of community hospitals and specialist IBD centres between June and October 2013. RESULTS:Experts argued that the main goal of MDT-driven IBD care is to improve patient outcomes via sharing collective expertise in a formalised manner. Themes regarding the necessary requirements for an IBD MDT to occur included good attendance, proactive contribution, a need to define core members and appropriate and functional computer facilities. Emergent themes regarding the logistics of an effective IBD MDT included an eligibility criterion for case selection and discussion and appropriate scheduling. Themes regarding the overall design of the IBD MDT included a 'hub-and-spoke' model versus a 'single-centre' model. CONCLUSIONS:Defining key elements for an optimal design format for the IBD MDT is necessary to ensure quality of care and reduce variation in care standards. This study has produced a set of expert-based standards that can be used to structure the IBD MDT. These standards now require larger scale validation and consensus prior to becoming a practical guideline for the management of IBD care.

SUBMITTER: Morar P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5369592 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Defining the optimal design of the inflammatory bowel disease multidisciplinary team: results from a multicentre qualitative expert-based study.

Morar Pritesh P Read Jamie J Arora Sonal S Hart Ailsa A Warusavitarne Janindra J Green James J Sevdalis Nick N Edwards Cathryn C Faiz Omar O

Frontline gastroenterology 20150326 4

<h4>Objective</h4>To elicit expert views to define the aims, optimal design, format and function of an inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) multidisciplinary team (MDT) with the overall purpose of enhancing the quality of MDT-driven care within an IBD service provision.<h4>Design</h4>This study was a multicentre, prospective, qualitative study using a standard semistructured interview methodology.<h4>Participants</h4>A multidisciplinary sample of 28 semistructured interviews of which there are six c ...[more]

PMID: 28839825

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionCrohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) are chronic, inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). Each class and type of medication available for the treatment of IBD has distinct characteristics and long-term effects that a patient may consider. We present the results of qualitative research that aimed to develop a descriptive framework that outlines the most relevant disease and/or treatment attributes for IBD treatment decisions and focuses on the patient perspective.MethodsThis research employed a three-step approach: a literature review to identify a broad list of attributes, a focus group meeting including patients and clinicians to assess the relevance of the attributes, and two rounds of voting to name and define each attribute. The literature review was used to develop the initial list of attributes. Although the same attributes were defined for both UC and CD, the relative importance of each attribute to UC or CD was considered. The list of attributes was discussed and evaluated in the focus group meeting, which included eight patient representatives and nine gastroenterologists. Using feedback elicited from the focus group meeting, the research team developed a draft of the descriptive framework that grouped the attributes into domain subsets. All members of the focus group participated in two subsequent rounds of structured, online voting, which was used to refine the wording to name and define each attribute. Additionally, participants ranked all the attributes included in the descriptive framework to suggest which attributes were less relevant and could be omitted.ResultsAmong 574 publications retrieved from the databases and registries, we identified 32 eligible publications, and an initial list of attributes was developed. This list was refined during the focus group meeting, resulting in a draft descriptive framework of attributes within subsets of domains. The final descriptive framework was developed based on structured rounds of online voting to further refine attribute names and definitions. In the final descriptive framework, a total of ten attributes were identified: abdominal pain, other disease-related pain, bowel urgency, fatigue, risk of cancer and serious infections within the next 10 years, risk of mild to moderate complications, aesthetic complications related to treatment, emotional status, sexual life, and social life and relationships. These attributes were distributed across three domains: efficacy, complications and risk, and health-related quality of life.ConclusionsThrough the identification of the ten most relevant attributes that influence patient decision making for IBD treatments, we developed a descriptive framework that should be considered by physicians when discussing IBD treatment options with their patients. The results of our qualitative research may also be helpful for the development of future IBD clinical studies and quantitative research.

Project description:BackgroundMultidisciplinary teams (MDT) formulate expert informed treatment recommendations for people with cancer. We set out to examine how the factors proposed by the functional perspective of group decision making (DM), that is, interaction process, internal factors (factors emanating from within the group such as group size), external circumstances (factors coming from the outside of the team), and case-complexity affect the quality of MDT decision making.MethodsThis was a cross-sectional observational study. Three cancer MDTs were recruited with 44 members overall and 30 of their weekly meetings filmed. Validated observational instruments were used to measure quality of DM, interactions, and complexity of 822 case discussions.ResultsThe full regression model with the variables proposed by the functional perspective was significant, R2 = 0.52, F(20, 801) = 43.47, P < .001, adjusted R2 = 0.51. Positive predictors of DM quality were asking questions (P = .001), providing answers (P = .001), team size (P = .007), gender balance (P = .003), and clinical complexity (P = .001), while negative socioemotional reactions (P = .007), gender imbalance (P = .003), logistical issues (P = .001), time-workload pressures (P = .002), and time spent in the meeting (P = .001) were negative predictors. Second half of the meetings also saw significant decrease in the DM quality (P = .001), interactions (P = .001), group size (P = .003), and clinical complexity (P = .001), and an increase in negative socioemotional reactions (P = .001) and time-workload pressures (P = .001).DiscussionTo the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to attempt to assess the factors proposed by the functional perspective in cancer MDTs. One novel finding is the effect of sociocognitive factors on team DM quality, while another is the cognitive-catch 22 effect: while the case discussions are significantly simpler in the second half of the meeting, there is significantly less time left to discuss the remaining cases, further adding to the cognitive taxation in teams who are now rapidly attempting to close their time-workload gap. Implications are discussed in relation to quality and safety.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) are an integral component in the delivery of health care. This is particularly evident in the delivery of cancer care, where multidisciplinary teams are internationally recognized as the preferred method for service delivery. The use of health information systems and technology are key enabling factors for building the capacity of MDTs to engage in improvement and implementation projects but there is scant research on how MDTs make use of technology and information systems or the kinds of systems needed for them to undertake improvement and implementation research. This paper reports findings on how seven MDTs in cancer care utilized technological and information systems and the barriers and enabling factors that impacted on their uptake. METHODS:Seven multidisciplinary teams from two large metropolitan hospitals participated in the study. Qualitative methods including structured observations and semi structured interviews that explored how teams engaged in research and improvement activities were utilized. Participants were also observed and interviewed in relation to their use of data and health information systems. Findings were subject to content analysis and key themes were identified. Interviews were transcribed and de-identified and key themes were subsequently discussed with participants to allow for member checking and further clarification of findings. RESULTS:A total of 43 MDT meetings across seven tumor streams were observed. Of these, observation notes from 13 meetings contained direct references to emerging technologies and health information systems. Findings from 15 semi-structured interviews were also analyzed in relation to how MDTs used technology in weekly meetings, and the perceived impact of technology. Three broad themes emerged: (1) methods for data collection and use by MDTs, (2) the impact of technology on the MDT meeting environment, and (3) the impact of technology and information systems on clinical decision making. CONCLUSION:The study demonstrates that real time data collection and imaging may improve patient centered care coordination. However, ICTs can be used sub-optimally by teams. We therefore urge additional research to identify the enabling factors that support better collection and use of outcome data from ICT.

Project description:The prescribing and use of opioid analgesics is increasing in Italy owing to a profusion in the number and types of opioid analgesic products available, and the increasing prevalence of conditions associated with severe pain, the latter being related to population aging. Herein we provide the expert opinion of an Italian multidisciplinary panel on the management of opioid-induced constipation (OIC) and bowel dysfunction. OIC and opioid-induced bowel dysfunction are well-recognised unwanted effects of treatment with opioid analgesics that can profoundly affect quality of life. OIC can be due to additional factors such as reduced mobility, a low-fibre diet, comorbidities, and concomitant medications. Fixed-dose combinations of opioids with mu (μ) opioid receptor antagonists, such as oxycodone/naloxone, have become available, but have limited utility in clinical practice because the individual components cannot be independently titrated, creating a risk of breakthrough pain as the dose is increased. A comprehensive prevention and management strategy for OIC should include interventions that aim to improve fibre and fluid intake, increase mobility or exercise, and restore bowel function without compromising pain control. Recommended first-line pharmacological treatment of OIC is with an osmotic laxative (preferably polyethylene glycol [macrogol]), or a stimulant laxative such as an anthraquinone. A second laxative with a complementary mechanism of action should be added in the event of an inadequate response. Second-line treatment with a peripherally acting μ opioid receptor antagonist (PAMORA), such as methylnaltrexone, naloxegol or naldemedine, should be considered in patients with OIC that has not responded to combination laxative treatment. Prokinetics or intestinal secretagogues, such as lubiprostone, may be appropriate in the third-line setting, but their use in OIC is off-label in Italy, and should therefore be restricted to settings such as specialist centres and clinical trials.

Project description:BackgroundCancer is the leading cause of premature death in Canada. In the last decade, important gains in cancer survival have been achieved by advances in adjuvant treatment. However, many oncologic treatments also result in cardiovascular "toxicity". Furthermore, cardiac risk factors such as hypertension, dyslipidemia, and diabetes mellitus are known to contribute to the progression of cardiac damage and clinical cardiotoxicity. As such, for many survivors, the risk of death from cardiac disease exceeds that of recurrent cancer. While provision of care by multidisciplinary teams has been shown to reduce mortality and hospitalizations among heart failure patients, the effect of assessments and interventions by multidisciplinary specialists in cancer patients receiving cardiotoxic chemotherapy regimens is currently unknown. Accordingly, we will examine the effect of a multi-disciplinary team interventions in the early assessment, identification and treatment of cardiovascular risk factors in cancer patients receiving adjuvant systemic therapy. Our main hypothesis is to determine if the incidence of LV dysfunction in cancer patients undergoing adjuvant therapy can be reduced through a multidisciplinary team approach.Methods/designThis is a randomized study comparing intensive multidisciplinary team intervention to usual care in the prevention of LV remodeling in patients receiving anthracycline or trastuzumab-based chemotherapy. Main objectives include early detection strategies for cardiotoxicity using novel biomarkers that reflect myocardial injury, remodeling and/or dysfunction; early identification and intensive treatment of cardiovascular risk factors; and early intervention with supportive care strategies including nutritional and pharmacist counselling, exercise training and cardiology team support. Secondary objectives include correlation of novel biomarkers to clinical outcomes; correlation of multidisciplinary interventions to adverse clinical outcomes; relationship of multidisciplinary interventions and chemotherapy dose density; preservation of lean muscle mass; and patient reported outcomes (symptom intensity and quality of life).DiscussionCardiac toxicity as a result of cancer therapies is now recognized as a significant health problem of increasing prevalence. To our knowledge, TITAN will be the first randomized trial examining the utility of multidisciplinary team care in the prevention of cardiotoxicity. We expect our results to inform comprehensive and holistic care for patients at risk for negative cancer therapy mediated sequelae.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01621659 Registration Date 4 June 2012.

Project description:ObjectiveTo understand multidisciplinary team healthcare professionals' perceptions of current and optimal provision of acute rehabilitation, perceived facilitators and barriers to implementation, and their implications for patient recovery, using hip fracture as an example.MethodsA qualitative design was adopted using semi-structured telephone interviews with 20 members of the acute multidisciplinary healthcare team (occupational therapists, physiotherapists, physicians, nurses) working on orthopaedic wards at 15 different hospitals across the UK. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, anonymised, and then thematically analysed drawing on the Theoretical Domains Framework to enhance our understanding of the findings.ResultsWe identified four themes: conceptualising a model of rehabilitative practice, which reflected the perceived variability of rehabilitation models, along with facilitators and common patient and organisational barriers for optimal rehabilitation; competing professional and organisational goals, which highlighted the reported incompatibility between organisational goals and person-centred care shaping rehabilitation practices, particularly for more vulnerable patients; engaging teams in collaborative practice, which related to the expressed need to work well with all members of the multidisciplinary team to achieve the same person-centred goals and share rehabilitation practices; and engaging patients and their carers, highlighting the importance of their involvement to achieve a holistic and collaborative approach to rehabilitation in the acute setting. Barriers and facilitators within themes were underpinned by the lack or presence of adequate ways of communicating with patients, carers, and multidisciplinary team members; resources (e.g. equipment, staffing, group classes), and support from people in leadership positions such as management and senior staff.ConclusionsCornerstones of optimal acute rehabilitation are effective communication and collaborative practices between the multidisciplinary team, patients and carers. Supportive management and leadership are central to optimise these processes. Organisational constraints are the most commonly perceived barrier to delivering effective rehabilitation in hospital settings, which exacerbate silo working and limited patient engagement.

Dataset Information

Defining the optimal design of the inflammatory bowel disease multidisciplinary team: results from a multicentre qualitative expert-based study.

Publications

Defining the optimal design of the inflammatory bowel disease multidisciplinary team: results from a multicentre qualitative expert-based study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets