Cargando…
Evaluating the interstitial lung disease multidisciplinary meeting: a survey of expert centres
BACKGROUND: Multidisciplinary meetings (MDM) are the current “gold standard” in interstitial lung disease (ILD) diagnosis and comprise inter-disciplinary discussion of multiple forms of information to provide diagnostic and management outputs. Although bias could be potentially inserted at any step...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4736654/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26831722 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12890-016-0179-3 |
_version_ | 1782413326975762432 |
---|---|
author | Jo, Helen E. Corte, Tamera J. Moodley, Yuben Levin, Kovi Westall, Glen Hopkins, Peter Chambers, Daniel Glaspole, Ian |
author_facet | Jo, Helen E. Corte, Tamera J. Moodley, Yuben Levin, Kovi Westall, Glen Hopkins, Peter Chambers, Daniel Glaspole, Ian |
author_sort | Jo, Helen E. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Multidisciplinary meetings (MDM) are the current “gold standard” in interstitial lung disease (ILD) diagnosis and comprise inter-disciplinary discussion of multiple forms of information to provide diagnostic and management outputs. Although bias could be potentially inserted at any step in the discussion process, to date there has been no consensus regarding the appropriate constitution and governance of MDM. We sought to determine the features of ILD MDMs based within ILD centres of excellence around the world. METHODS: An internet based questionnaire was sent to twelve expert centres in Europe, North America, and Australia seeking information regarding the structure and governance of their MDM. Data was analysed for consistent themes and points of contrast. RESULTS: Responses were received from 10 out of 12 centres. Similarities were demonstrated with regards to contributing attendees, meeting frequency and case numbers reviewed. Significant heterogeneity in attendee speciality group type, quantity and method of data presentation, approach to diagnosis formulation and documentation, and information provision was apparent. CONCLUSIONS: The constitution of ILD MDMs differs considerably between expert centres. Such differences may result in discordant outcomes, and emphasise the need for further evidence regarding the appropriate constitution and governance of ILD MDMs. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12890-016-0179-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4736654 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-47366542016-02-03 Evaluating the interstitial lung disease multidisciplinary meeting: a survey of expert centres Jo, Helen E. Corte, Tamera J. Moodley, Yuben Levin, Kovi Westall, Glen Hopkins, Peter Chambers, Daniel Glaspole, Ian BMC Pulm Med Research Article BACKGROUND: Multidisciplinary meetings (MDM) are the current “gold standard” in interstitial lung disease (ILD) diagnosis and comprise inter-disciplinary discussion of multiple forms of information to provide diagnostic and management outputs. Although bias could be potentially inserted at any step in the discussion process, to date there has been no consensus regarding the appropriate constitution and governance of MDM. We sought to determine the features of ILD MDMs based within ILD centres of excellence around the world. METHODS: An internet based questionnaire was sent to twelve expert centres in Europe, North America, and Australia seeking information regarding the structure and governance of their MDM. Data was analysed for consistent themes and points of contrast. RESULTS: Responses were received from 10 out of 12 centres. Similarities were demonstrated with regards to contributing attendees, meeting frequency and case numbers reviewed. Significant heterogeneity in attendee speciality group type, quantity and method of data presentation, approach to diagnosis formulation and documentation, and information provision was apparent. CONCLUSIONS: The constitution of ILD MDMs differs considerably between expert centres. Such differences may result in discordant outcomes, and emphasise the need for further evidence regarding the appropriate constitution and governance of ILD MDMs. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12890-016-0179-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2016-02-01 /pmc/articles/PMC4736654/ /pubmed/26831722 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12890-016-0179-3 Text en © Jo et al. 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Jo, Helen E. Corte, Tamera J. Moodley, Yuben Levin, Kovi Westall, Glen Hopkins, Peter Chambers, Daniel Glaspole, Ian Evaluating the interstitial lung disease multidisciplinary meeting: a survey of expert centres |
title | Evaluating the interstitial lung disease multidisciplinary meeting: a survey of expert centres |
title_full | Evaluating the interstitial lung disease multidisciplinary meeting: a survey of expert centres |
title_fullStr | Evaluating the interstitial lung disease multidisciplinary meeting: a survey of expert centres |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluating the interstitial lung disease multidisciplinary meeting: a survey of expert centres |
title_short | Evaluating the interstitial lung disease multidisciplinary meeting: a survey of expert centres |
title_sort | evaluating the interstitial lung disease multidisciplinary meeting: a survey of expert centres |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4736654/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26831722 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12890-016-0179-3 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT johelene evaluatingtheinterstitiallungdiseasemultidisciplinarymeetingasurveyofexpertcentres AT cortetameraj evaluatingtheinterstitiallungdiseasemultidisciplinarymeetingasurveyofexpertcentres AT moodleyyuben evaluatingtheinterstitiallungdiseasemultidisciplinarymeetingasurveyofexpertcentres AT levinkovi evaluatingtheinterstitiallungdiseasemultidisciplinarymeetingasurveyofexpertcentres AT westallglen evaluatingtheinterstitiallungdiseasemultidisciplinarymeetingasurveyofexpertcentres AT hopkinspeter evaluatingtheinterstitiallungdiseasemultidisciplinarymeetingasurveyofexpertcentres AT chambersdaniel evaluatingtheinterstitiallungdiseasemultidisciplinarymeetingasurveyofexpertcentres AT glaspoleian evaluatingtheinterstitiallungdiseasemultidisciplinarymeetingasurveyofexpertcentres |