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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: 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.
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