Cargando…
The impact of tumor board on cancer care: evidence from an umbrella review
BACKGROUND: Tumor Boards (TBs) are Multidisciplinary Team (MDT) meetings in which different specialists work together closely sharing clinical decisions in cancer care. The composition is variable, depending on the type of tumor discussed. As an organizational tool, MDTs are thought to optimize pati...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6995197/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32005232 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-4930-3 |
_version_ | 1783493338951843840 |
---|---|
author | Specchia, Maria Lucia Frisicale, Emanuela Maria Carini, Elettra Di Pilla, Andrea Cappa, Danila Barbara, Andrea Ricciardi, Walter Damiani, Gianfranco |
author_facet | Specchia, Maria Lucia Frisicale, Emanuela Maria Carini, Elettra Di Pilla, Andrea Cappa, Danila Barbara, Andrea Ricciardi, Walter Damiani, Gianfranco |
author_sort | Specchia, Maria Lucia |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Tumor Boards (TBs) are Multidisciplinary Team (MDT) meetings in which different specialists work together closely sharing clinical decisions in cancer care. The composition is variable, depending on the type of tumor discussed. As an organizational tool, MDTs are thought to optimize patient outcomes and to improve care performance. The aim of the study was to perform an umbrella review summarizing the available evidence on the impact of TBs on healthcare outcomes and processes. METHODS: Pubmed and Web of Science databases were investigated along with a search through citations. The only study design included was systematic review. Only reviews published after 1997 concerning TBs and performed in hospital settings were considered. Two researchers synthetized the studies and assessed their quality through the AMSTAR2 tool. RESULTS: Five systematic reviews published between 2008 and 2017 were retrieved. One review was focused on gastrointestinal cancers and included 16 studies; another one was centered on lung cancer and included 16 studies; the remaining three studies considered a wide range of tumors and included 27, 37 and 51 studies each. The main characteristics about format and members and the definition of TBs were collected. The decisions taken during TBs led to changes in diagnosis (probability to receive a more accurate assessment and staging), treatment (usually more appropriate) and survival (not unanimous improvement shown). Other outcomes less highlighted were quality of life, satisfaction and waiting times. CONCLUSIONS: The study showed that the multidisciplinary approach is the best way to deliver the complex care needed by cancer patients; however, it is a challenge that requires organizational and cultural changes and must be led by competent health managers who can improve teamwork within their organizations. Further studies are needed to reinforce existing literature concerning health outcomes. Evidence on the impact of TBs on clinical practices is still lacking for many aspects of cancer care. Further studies should aim to evaluate the impact on survival rates, quality of life and patient satisfaction. Regular studies should be carried out and new process indicators should be defined to assess the impact and the performance of TBs more consistently. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6995197 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-69951972020-02-04 The impact of tumor board on cancer care: evidence from an umbrella review Specchia, Maria Lucia Frisicale, Emanuela Maria Carini, Elettra Di Pilla, Andrea Cappa, Danila Barbara, Andrea Ricciardi, Walter Damiani, Gianfranco BMC Health Serv Res Research Article BACKGROUND: Tumor Boards (TBs) are Multidisciplinary Team (MDT) meetings in which different specialists work together closely sharing clinical decisions in cancer care. The composition is variable, depending on the type of tumor discussed. As an organizational tool, MDTs are thought to optimize patient outcomes and to improve care performance. The aim of the study was to perform an umbrella review summarizing the available evidence on the impact of TBs on healthcare outcomes and processes. METHODS: Pubmed and Web of Science databases were investigated along with a search through citations. The only study design included was systematic review. Only reviews published after 1997 concerning TBs and performed in hospital settings were considered. Two researchers synthetized the studies and assessed their quality through the AMSTAR2 tool. RESULTS: Five systematic reviews published between 2008 and 2017 were retrieved. One review was focused on gastrointestinal cancers and included 16 studies; another one was centered on lung cancer and included 16 studies; the remaining three studies considered a wide range of tumors and included 27, 37 and 51 studies each. The main characteristics about format and members and the definition of TBs were collected. The decisions taken during TBs led to changes in diagnosis (probability to receive a more accurate assessment and staging), treatment (usually more appropriate) and survival (not unanimous improvement shown). Other outcomes less highlighted were quality of life, satisfaction and waiting times. CONCLUSIONS: The study showed that the multidisciplinary approach is the best way to deliver the complex care needed by cancer patients; however, it is a challenge that requires organizational and cultural changes and must be led by competent health managers who can improve teamwork within their organizations. Further studies are needed to reinforce existing literature concerning health outcomes. Evidence on the impact of TBs on clinical practices is still lacking for many aspects of cancer care. Further studies should aim to evaluate the impact on survival rates, quality of life and patient satisfaction. Regular studies should be carried out and new process indicators should be defined to assess the impact and the performance of TBs more consistently. BioMed Central 2020-01-31 /pmc/articles/PMC6995197/ /pubmed/32005232 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-4930-3 Text en © The Author(s). 2020 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 Specchia, Maria Lucia Frisicale, Emanuela Maria Carini, Elettra Di Pilla, Andrea Cappa, Danila Barbara, Andrea Ricciardi, Walter Damiani, Gianfranco The impact of tumor board on cancer care: evidence from an umbrella review |
title | The impact of tumor board on cancer care: evidence from an umbrella review |
title_full | The impact of tumor board on cancer care: evidence from an umbrella review |
title_fullStr | The impact of tumor board on cancer care: evidence from an umbrella review |
title_full_unstemmed | The impact of tumor board on cancer care: evidence from an umbrella review |
title_short | The impact of tumor board on cancer care: evidence from an umbrella review |
title_sort | impact of tumor board on cancer care: evidence from an umbrella review |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6995197/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32005232 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-4930-3 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT specchiamarialucia theimpactoftumorboardoncancercareevidencefromanumbrellareview AT frisicaleemanuelamaria theimpactoftumorboardoncancercareevidencefromanumbrellareview AT carinielettra theimpactoftumorboardoncancercareevidencefromanumbrellareview AT dipillaandrea theimpactoftumorboardoncancercareevidencefromanumbrellareview AT cappadanila theimpactoftumorboardoncancercareevidencefromanumbrellareview AT barbaraandrea theimpactoftumorboardoncancercareevidencefromanumbrellareview AT ricciardiwalter theimpactoftumorboardoncancercareevidencefromanumbrellareview AT damianigianfranco theimpactoftumorboardoncancercareevidencefromanumbrellareview AT specchiamarialucia impactoftumorboardoncancercareevidencefromanumbrellareview AT frisicaleemanuelamaria impactoftumorboardoncancercareevidencefromanumbrellareview AT carinielettra impactoftumorboardoncancercareevidencefromanumbrellareview AT dipillaandrea impactoftumorboardoncancercareevidencefromanumbrellareview AT cappadanila impactoftumorboardoncancercareevidencefromanumbrellareview AT barbaraandrea impactoftumorboardoncancercareevidencefromanumbrellareview AT ricciardiwalter impactoftumorboardoncancercareevidencefromanumbrellareview AT damianigianfranco impactoftumorboardoncancercareevidencefromanumbrellareview |