Cargando…
Clinical decision trees support systematic evaluation of multidisciplinary team recommendations
PURPOSE: EUSOMA’s recommendation that “each patient has to be fully informed about each step in the diagnostic and therapeutic pathway” could be supported by guideline-based clinical decision trees (CDTs). The Dutch breast cancer guideline has been modeled into CDTs (www.oncoguide.nl). Prerequisites...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer US
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7383031/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32627108 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10549-020-05769-1 |
_version_ | 1783563363801890816 |
---|---|
author | Hendriks, Mathijs P. Verbeek, Xander A. A. M. van Manen, Jeannette G. van der Heijden, Sannah E. Go, Shirley H. L. Gooiker, Gea A. van Vegchel, Thijs Siesling, Sabine Jager, Agnes |
author_facet | Hendriks, Mathijs P. Verbeek, Xander A. A. M. van Manen, Jeannette G. van der Heijden, Sannah E. Go, Shirley H. L. Gooiker, Gea A. van Vegchel, Thijs Siesling, Sabine Jager, Agnes |
author_sort | Hendriks, Mathijs P. |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: EUSOMA’s recommendation that “each patient has to be fully informed about each step in the diagnostic and therapeutic pathway” could be supported by guideline-based clinical decision trees (CDTs). The Dutch breast cancer guideline has been modeled into CDTs (www.oncoguide.nl). Prerequisites for adequate CDT usage are availability of necessary patient data at the time of decision-making and to consider all possible treatment alternatives provided in the CDT. METHODS: This retrospective single-center study evaluated 394 randomly selected female patients with non-metastatic breast cancer between 2012 and 2015. Four pivotal CDTs were selected. Two researchers analyzed patient records to determine to which degree patient data required per CDT were available at the time of multidisciplinary team (MDT) meeting and how often multiple alternatives were actually reported. RESULTS: The four selected CDTs were indication for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan, preoperative and adjuvant systemic treatment, and immediate breast reconstruction. For 70%, 13%, 97% and 13% of patients, respectively, all necessary data were available. The two most frequent underreported data-items were “clinical M-stage” (87%) and “assessable mammography” (28%). Treatment alternatives were reported by MDTs in 32% of patients regarding primary treatment and in 28% regarding breast reconstruction. CONCLUSION: Both the availability of data in patient records essential for guideline-based recommendations and the reporting of possible treatment alternatives of the investigated CDTs were low. To meet EUSOMA’s requirements, information that is supposed to be implicitly known must be explicated by MDTs. Moreover, MDTs have to adhere to clear definitions of data-items in their reporting. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7383031 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Springer US |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-73830312020-08-04 Clinical decision trees support systematic evaluation of multidisciplinary team recommendations Hendriks, Mathijs P. Verbeek, Xander A. A. M. van Manen, Jeannette G. van der Heijden, Sannah E. Go, Shirley H. L. Gooiker, Gea A. van Vegchel, Thijs Siesling, Sabine Jager, Agnes Breast Cancer Res Treat Clinical Trial PURPOSE: EUSOMA’s recommendation that “each patient has to be fully informed about each step in the diagnostic and therapeutic pathway” could be supported by guideline-based clinical decision trees (CDTs). The Dutch breast cancer guideline has been modeled into CDTs (www.oncoguide.nl). Prerequisites for adequate CDT usage are availability of necessary patient data at the time of decision-making and to consider all possible treatment alternatives provided in the CDT. METHODS: This retrospective single-center study evaluated 394 randomly selected female patients with non-metastatic breast cancer between 2012 and 2015. Four pivotal CDTs were selected. Two researchers analyzed patient records to determine to which degree patient data required per CDT were available at the time of multidisciplinary team (MDT) meeting and how often multiple alternatives were actually reported. RESULTS: The four selected CDTs were indication for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan, preoperative and adjuvant systemic treatment, and immediate breast reconstruction. For 70%, 13%, 97% and 13% of patients, respectively, all necessary data were available. The two most frequent underreported data-items were “clinical M-stage” (87%) and “assessable mammography” (28%). Treatment alternatives were reported by MDTs in 32% of patients regarding primary treatment and in 28% regarding breast reconstruction. CONCLUSION: Both the availability of data in patient records essential for guideline-based recommendations and the reporting of possible treatment alternatives of the investigated CDTs were low. To meet EUSOMA’s requirements, information that is supposed to be implicitly known must be explicated by MDTs. Moreover, MDTs have to adhere to clear definitions of data-items in their reporting. Springer US 2020-07-06 2020 /pmc/articles/PMC7383031/ /pubmed/32627108 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10549-020-05769-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Clinical Trial Hendriks, Mathijs P. Verbeek, Xander A. A. M. van Manen, Jeannette G. van der Heijden, Sannah E. Go, Shirley H. L. Gooiker, Gea A. van Vegchel, Thijs Siesling, Sabine Jager, Agnes Clinical decision trees support systematic evaluation of multidisciplinary team recommendations |
title | Clinical decision trees support systematic evaluation of multidisciplinary team recommendations |
title_full | Clinical decision trees support systematic evaluation of multidisciplinary team recommendations |
title_fullStr | Clinical decision trees support systematic evaluation of multidisciplinary team recommendations |
title_full_unstemmed | Clinical decision trees support systematic evaluation of multidisciplinary team recommendations |
title_short | Clinical decision trees support systematic evaluation of multidisciplinary team recommendations |
title_sort | clinical decision trees support systematic evaluation of multidisciplinary team recommendations |
topic | Clinical Trial |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7383031/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32627108 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10549-020-05769-1 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hendriksmathijsp clinicaldecisiontreessupportsystematicevaluationofmultidisciplinaryteamrecommendations AT verbeekxanderaam clinicaldecisiontreessupportsystematicevaluationofmultidisciplinaryteamrecommendations AT vanmanenjeannetteg clinicaldecisiontreessupportsystematicevaluationofmultidisciplinaryteamrecommendations AT vanderheijdensannahe clinicaldecisiontreessupportsystematicevaluationofmultidisciplinaryteamrecommendations AT goshirleyhl clinicaldecisiontreessupportsystematicevaluationofmultidisciplinaryteamrecommendations AT gooikergeaa clinicaldecisiontreessupportsystematicevaluationofmultidisciplinaryteamrecommendations AT vanvegchelthijs clinicaldecisiontreessupportsystematicevaluationofmultidisciplinaryteamrecommendations AT sieslingsabine clinicaldecisiontreessupportsystematicevaluationofmultidisciplinaryteamrecommendations AT jageragnes clinicaldecisiontreessupportsystematicevaluationofmultidisciplinaryteamrecommendations |