Cargando…
Team dynamics and clinician’s experience influence decision-making during Upper-GI multidisciplinary team meetings: A multiple case study
BACKGROUND: The probability of undergoing treatment with curative intent for esophagogastric cancer has been shown to vary considerately between hospitals of diagnosis. Little is known about the factors that attribute to this variation. Since clinical decision making (CDM) partially takes place duri...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9623154/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36330470 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2022.1003506 |
_version_ | 1784821933541425152 |
---|---|
author | Luijten, J.C.H.B.M. Westerman, M.J. Nieuwenhuijzen, G.A.P. Walraven, J.E.W. Sosef, M.N. Beerepoot, L.V. van Hillegersberg, R. Muller, K. Hoekstra, R. Bergman, J.J.G.H.M. Siersema, P.D. van Laarhoven, H.W.M. Rosman, C. Brom, L. Vissers, P.A.J. Verhoeven, R.H.A. |
author_facet | Luijten, J.C.H.B.M. Westerman, M.J. Nieuwenhuijzen, G.A.P. Walraven, J.E.W. Sosef, M.N. Beerepoot, L.V. van Hillegersberg, R. Muller, K. Hoekstra, R. Bergman, J.J.G.H.M. Siersema, P.D. van Laarhoven, H.W.M. Rosman, C. Brom, L. Vissers, P.A.J. Verhoeven, R.H.A. |
author_sort | Luijten, J.C.H.B.M. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The probability of undergoing treatment with curative intent for esophagogastric cancer has been shown to vary considerately between hospitals of diagnosis. Little is known about the factors that attribute to this variation. Since clinical decision making (CDM) partially takes place during an MDTM, the aim of this qualitative study was to assess clinician’s perspectives regarding facilitators and barriers associated with CDM during MDTM, and second, to identify factors associated with CDM during an MDTM that may potentially explain differences in hospital practice. METHODS: A multiple case study design was conducted. The thematic content analysis of this qualitative study, focused on 16 MDTM observations, 30 semi-structured interviews with clinicians and seven focus groups with clinicians to complement the collected data. Interviews were transcribed ad verbatim and coded. RESULTS: Factors regarding team dynamics that were raised as aspects attributing to CDM were clinician’s personal characteristics such as ambition and the intention to be innovative. Clinician’s convictions regarding a certain treatment and its outcomes and previous experiences with treatment outcomes, and team dynamics within the MDTM influenced CDM. In addition, a continuum was illustrated. At one end of the continuum, teams tended to be more conservative, following the guidelines more strictly, versus the opposite in which hospitals tended towards a more invasive approach maximizing the probability of curation. CONCLUSION: This study contributes to the awareness that variation in team dynamics influences CDM during an MDTM. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9623154 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-96231542022-11-02 Team dynamics and clinician’s experience influence decision-making during Upper-GI multidisciplinary team meetings: A multiple case study Luijten, J.C.H.B.M. Westerman, M.J. Nieuwenhuijzen, G.A.P. Walraven, J.E.W. Sosef, M.N. Beerepoot, L.V. van Hillegersberg, R. Muller, K. Hoekstra, R. Bergman, J.J.G.H.M. Siersema, P.D. van Laarhoven, H.W.M. Rosman, C. Brom, L. Vissers, P.A.J. Verhoeven, R.H.A. Front Oncol Oncology BACKGROUND: The probability of undergoing treatment with curative intent for esophagogastric cancer has been shown to vary considerately between hospitals of diagnosis. Little is known about the factors that attribute to this variation. Since clinical decision making (CDM) partially takes place during an MDTM, the aim of this qualitative study was to assess clinician’s perspectives regarding facilitators and barriers associated with CDM during MDTM, and second, to identify factors associated with CDM during an MDTM that may potentially explain differences in hospital practice. METHODS: A multiple case study design was conducted. The thematic content analysis of this qualitative study, focused on 16 MDTM observations, 30 semi-structured interviews with clinicians and seven focus groups with clinicians to complement the collected data. Interviews were transcribed ad verbatim and coded. RESULTS: Factors regarding team dynamics that were raised as aspects attributing to CDM were clinician’s personal characteristics such as ambition and the intention to be innovative. Clinician’s convictions regarding a certain treatment and its outcomes and previous experiences with treatment outcomes, and team dynamics within the MDTM influenced CDM. In addition, a continuum was illustrated. At one end of the continuum, teams tended to be more conservative, following the guidelines more strictly, versus the opposite in which hospitals tended towards a more invasive approach maximizing the probability of curation. CONCLUSION: This study contributes to the awareness that variation in team dynamics influences CDM during an MDTM. Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-10-18 /pmc/articles/PMC9623154/ /pubmed/36330470 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2022.1003506 Text en Copyright © 2022 Luijten, Westerman, Nieuwenhuijzen, Walraven, Sosef, Beerepoot, van Hillegersberg, Muller, Hoekstra, Bergman, Siersema, van Laarhoven, Rosman, Brom, Vissers and Verhoeven https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Oncology Luijten, J.C.H.B.M. Westerman, M.J. Nieuwenhuijzen, G.A.P. Walraven, J.E.W. Sosef, M.N. Beerepoot, L.V. van Hillegersberg, R. Muller, K. Hoekstra, R. Bergman, J.J.G.H.M. Siersema, P.D. van Laarhoven, H.W.M. Rosman, C. Brom, L. Vissers, P.A.J. Verhoeven, R.H.A. Team dynamics and clinician’s experience influence decision-making during Upper-GI multidisciplinary team meetings: A multiple case study |
title | Team dynamics and clinician’s experience influence decision-making during Upper-GI multidisciplinary team meetings: A multiple case study |
title_full | Team dynamics and clinician’s experience influence decision-making during Upper-GI multidisciplinary team meetings: A multiple case study |
title_fullStr | Team dynamics and clinician’s experience influence decision-making during Upper-GI multidisciplinary team meetings: A multiple case study |
title_full_unstemmed | Team dynamics and clinician’s experience influence decision-making during Upper-GI multidisciplinary team meetings: A multiple case study |
title_short | Team dynamics and clinician’s experience influence decision-making during Upper-GI multidisciplinary team meetings: A multiple case study |
title_sort | team dynamics and clinician’s experience influence decision-making during upper-gi multidisciplinary team meetings: a multiple case study |
topic | Oncology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9623154/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36330470 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2022.1003506 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT luijtenjchbm teamdynamicsandcliniciansexperienceinfluencedecisionmakingduringuppergimultidisciplinaryteammeetingsamultiplecasestudy AT westermanmj teamdynamicsandcliniciansexperienceinfluencedecisionmakingduringuppergimultidisciplinaryteammeetingsamultiplecasestudy AT nieuwenhuijzengap teamdynamicsandcliniciansexperienceinfluencedecisionmakingduringuppergimultidisciplinaryteammeetingsamultiplecasestudy AT walravenjew teamdynamicsandcliniciansexperienceinfluencedecisionmakingduringuppergimultidisciplinaryteammeetingsamultiplecasestudy AT sosefmn teamdynamicsandcliniciansexperienceinfluencedecisionmakingduringuppergimultidisciplinaryteammeetingsamultiplecasestudy AT beerepootlv teamdynamicsandcliniciansexperienceinfluencedecisionmakingduringuppergimultidisciplinaryteammeetingsamultiplecasestudy AT vanhillegersbergr teamdynamicsandcliniciansexperienceinfluencedecisionmakingduringuppergimultidisciplinaryteammeetingsamultiplecasestudy AT mullerk teamdynamicsandcliniciansexperienceinfluencedecisionmakingduringuppergimultidisciplinaryteammeetingsamultiplecasestudy AT hoekstrar teamdynamicsandcliniciansexperienceinfluencedecisionmakingduringuppergimultidisciplinaryteammeetingsamultiplecasestudy AT bergmanjjghm teamdynamicsandcliniciansexperienceinfluencedecisionmakingduringuppergimultidisciplinaryteammeetingsamultiplecasestudy AT siersemapd teamdynamicsandcliniciansexperienceinfluencedecisionmakingduringuppergimultidisciplinaryteammeetingsamultiplecasestudy AT vanlaarhovenhwm teamdynamicsandcliniciansexperienceinfluencedecisionmakingduringuppergimultidisciplinaryteammeetingsamultiplecasestudy AT rosmanc teamdynamicsandcliniciansexperienceinfluencedecisionmakingduringuppergimultidisciplinaryteammeetingsamultiplecasestudy AT broml teamdynamicsandcliniciansexperienceinfluencedecisionmakingduringuppergimultidisciplinaryteammeetingsamultiplecasestudy AT visserspaj teamdynamicsandcliniciansexperienceinfluencedecisionmakingduringuppergimultidisciplinaryteammeetingsamultiplecasestudy AT verhoevenrha teamdynamicsandcliniciansexperienceinfluencedecisionmakingduringuppergimultidisciplinaryteammeetingsamultiplecasestudy |