Cargando…
A multi‐method evaluation of the implementation of a cancer teamwork assessment and feedback improvement programme (MDT‐FIT) across a large integrated cancer system
BACKGROUND: Globally, Multidisciplinary Teams (MDTs) are considered the gold standard for diagnosis and treatment of cancer and other conditions, but variability in performance has led to demand for improvement tools. MDT‐FIT (Multidisciplinary Team Feedback for Improving Teamwork) is an improvement...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7926008/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33480191 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.3719 |
_version_ | 1783659376668573696 |
---|---|
author | Taylor, Cath Harris, Jenny Stenner, Karen Sevdalis, Nick Green, S A James |
author_facet | Taylor, Cath Harris, Jenny Stenner, Karen Sevdalis, Nick Green, S A James |
author_sort | Taylor, Cath |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Globally, Multidisciplinary Teams (MDTs) are considered the gold standard for diagnosis and treatment of cancer and other conditions, but variability in performance has led to demand for improvement tools. MDT‐FIT (Multidisciplinary Team Feedback for Improving Teamwork) is an improvement programme developed iteratively with over 100 MDTs (≥1100 MDT‐members). Complex interventions are often adapted to context, but this is rarely evaluated. We conducted a prospective evaluation of the implementation of MDT‐FIT across an entire integrated care system (ICS). METHODS: MDT‐FIT was implemented within all breast cancer MDTs across an ICS in England (n = 10 MDTs; 275 medical, nursing, and administrative members). ICS managers coordinated the implementation across the three stages of MDT‐FIT: set up; assessment (self‐report by team members plus independent observational assessment); team‐feedback and facilitated discussion to agree actions for improvement. Data were collected using process and systems logs, and interviews with a purposively selected range of participants. Analysis was theoretically grounded in evidence‐based frameworks for implementation strategies and outcomes. RESULTS: All 10 MDTs participated in MDT‐FIT; 36 interviews were conducted. Data from systems and process logs covered a 9‐month period. Adaptations to MDT‐FIT by the ICS (e.g., coordination of team participation by ICS rather than individual hospitals; and reducing time protected for coordination) reduced Fidelity and Adoption of MDT‐FIT. However, the Acceptability, Appropriateness and Feasibility of MDT‐FIT remained high due to embedding implementation strategies in the development of MDT‐FIT (e.g., stakeholder engagement, interactive support). CONCLUSIONS: This is a unique and comprehensive evaluation of the multi‐site implementation of a complex team improvement programme. Findings support the imperative of considering implementation strategies when designing such programmes to minimize potentially negative impacts of adaptations in “real world” settings. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7926008 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-79260082021-03-12 A multi‐method evaluation of the implementation of a cancer teamwork assessment and feedback improvement programme (MDT‐FIT) across a large integrated cancer system Taylor, Cath Harris, Jenny Stenner, Karen Sevdalis, Nick Green, S A James Cancer Med Clinical Cancer Research BACKGROUND: Globally, Multidisciplinary Teams (MDTs) are considered the gold standard for diagnosis and treatment of cancer and other conditions, but variability in performance has led to demand for improvement tools. MDT‐FIT (Multidisciplinary Team Feedback for Improving Teamwork) is an improvement programme developed iteratively with over 100 MDTs (≥1100 MDT‐members). Complex interventions are often adapted to context, but this is rarely evaluated. We conducted a prospective evaluation of the implementation of MDT‐FIT across an entire integrated care system (ICS). METHODS: MDT‐FIT was implemented within all breast cancer MDTs across an ICS in England (n = 10 MDTs; 275 medical, nursing, and administrative members). ICS managers coordinated the implementation across the three stages of MDT‐FIT: set up; assessment (self‐report by team members plus independent observational assessment); team‐feedback and facilitated discussion to agree actions for improvement. Data were collected using process and systems logs, and interviews with a purposively selected range of participants. Analysis was theoretically grounded in evidence‐based frameworks for implementation strategies and outcomes. RESULTS: All 10 MDTs participated in MDT‐FIT; 36 interviews were conducted. Data from systems and process logs covered a 9‐month period. Adaptations to MDT‐FIT by the ICS (e.g., coordination of team participation by ICS rather than individual hospitals; and reducing time protected for coordination) reduced Fidelity and Adoption of MDT‐FIT. However, the Acceptability, Appropriateness and Feasibility of MDT‐FIT remained high due to embedding implementation strategies in the development of MDT‐FIT (e.g., stakeholder engagement, interactive support). CONCLUSIONS: This is a unique and comprehensive evaluation of the multi‐site implementation of a complex team improvement programme. Findings support the imperative of considering implementation strategies when designing such programmes to minimize potentially negative impacts of adaptations in “real world” settings. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-01-21 /pmc/articles/PMC7926008/ /pubmed/33480191 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.3719 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Clinical Cancer Research Taylor, Cath Harris, Jenny Stenner, Karen Sevdalis, Nick Green, S A James A multi‐method evaluation of the implementation of a cancer teamwork assessment and feedback improvement programme (MDT‐FIT) across a large integrated cancer system |
title | A multi‐method evaluation of the implementation of a cancer teamwork assessment and feedback improvement programme (MDT‐FIT) across a large integrated cancer system |
title_full | A multi‐method evaluation of the implementation of a cancer teamwork assessment and feedback improvement programme (MDT‐FIT) across a large integrated cancer system |
title_fullStr | A multi‐method evaluation of the implementation of a cancer teamwork assessment and feedback improvement programme (MDT‐FIT) across a large integrated cancer system |
title_full_unstemmed | A multi‐method evaluation of the implementation of a cancer teamwork assessment and feedback improvement programme (MDT‐FIT) across a large integrated cancer system |
title_short | A multi‐method evaluation of the implementation of a cancer teamwork assessment and feedback improvement programme (MDT‐FIT) across a large integrated cancer system |
title_sort | multi‐method evaluation of the implementation of a cancer teamwork assessment and feedback improvement programme (mdt‐fit) across a large integrated cancer system |
topic | Clinical Cancer Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7926008/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33480191 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.3719 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT taylorcath amultimethodevaluationoftheimplementationofacancerteamworkassessmentandfeedbackimprovementprogrammemdtfitacrossalargeintegratedcancersystem AT harrisjenny amultimethodevaluationoftheimplementationofacancerteamworkassessmentandfeedbackimprovementprogrammemdtfitacrossalargeintegratedcancersystem AT stennerkaren amultimethodevaluationoftheimplementationofacancerteamworkassessmentandfeedbackimprovementprogrammemdtfitacrossalargeintegratedcancersystem AT sevdalisnick amultimethodevaluationoftheimplementationofacancerteamworkassessmentandfeedbackimprovementprogrammemdtfitacrossalargeintegratedcancersystem AT greensajames amultimethodevaluationoftheimplementationofacancerteamworkassessmentandfeedbackimprovementprogrammemdtfitacrossalargeintegratedcancersystem AT taylorcath multimethodevaluationoftheimplementationofacancerteamworkassessmentandfeedbackimprovementprogrammemdtfitacrossalargeintegratedcancersystem AT harrisjenny multimethodevaluationoftheimplementationofacancerteamworkassessmentandfeedbackimprovementprogrammemdtfitacrossalargeintegratedcancersystem AT stennerkaren multimethodevaluationoftheimplementationofacancerteamworkassessmentandfeedbackimprovementprogrammemdtfitacrossalargeintegratedcancersystem AT sevdalisnick multimethodevaluationoftheimplementationofacancerteamworkassessmentandfeedbackimprovementprogrammemdtfitacrossalargeintegratedcancersystem AT greensajames multimethodevaluationoftheimplementationofacancerteamworkassessmentandfeedbackimprovementprogrammemdtfitacrossalargeintegratedcancersystem |