TY - JOUR
T1 - Exploring the impact of uro-oncology multidisciplinary team meetings on patient outcomes
T2 - A systematic review
AU - Askelin, Blake
AU - Hind, Alica
AU - Paterson, Catherine
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 Elsevier Ltd
PY - 2021/10
Y1 - 2021/10
N2 - Purpose: Multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings are mainstay clinical management globally. Clinical guidelines state that patients should be considered for MDT review, but evidence has identified that within the specialty of uro-oncology not all patients are reviewed by an MDT. This systematic review aimed to understand the impact of uro-oncology MDT meetings on patient outcomes, to explore how patient engagement is incorporated in the process, and to identify the barriers and facilitators within an MDT. Methods: A systematic review was reported according to PRISMA guidelines. Electronic databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL and PsychINFO) were searched in EBSCOhost from January 2010 to March 2021, using a range of key search words. Studies were assessed for inclusion according to a pre-defined eligibility criteria. Data extraction and quality assessment was undertaken. The findings were tabulated, and a narrative synthesis undertaken. Results: 373 articles were screened, and seven studies were included. The studies were conducted in a range of international countries which provided an overview of uro-oncology MDTs in different healthcare contexts. The following themes were identified: 1) MDT and clinical outcomes, 2) structure and format, 3) patient engagement in the process, and 4) barriers and facilitators. Conclusion: Cancer care is constantly being challenged due to complex newer therapies, including multimodality treatments, and newer emergent broader considerations such as, oncogeriatrics, genetic counselling, and survivorship issues which should have a central place for consideration in the MDT.
AB - Purpose: Multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings are mainstay clinical management globally. Clinical guidelines state that patients should be considered for MDT review, but evidence has identified that within the specialty of uro-oncology not all patients are reviewed by an MDT. This systematic review aimed to understand the impact of uro-oncology MDT meetings on patient outcomes, to explore how patient engagement is incorporated in the process, and to identify the barriers and facilitators within an MDT. Methods: A systematic review was reported according to PRISMA guidelines. Electronic databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL and PsychINFO) were searched in EBSCOhost from January 2010 to March 2021, using a range of key search words. Studies were assessed for inclusion according to a pre-defined eligibility criteria. Data extraction and quality assessment was undertaken. The findings were tabulated, and a narrative synthesis undertaken. Results: 373 articles were screened, and seven studies were included. The studies were conducted in a range of international countries which provided an overview of uro-oncology MDTs in different healthcare contexts. The following themes were identified: 1) MDT and clinical outcomes, 2) structure and format, 3) patient engagement in the process, and 4) barriers and facilitators. Conclusion: Cancer care is constantly being challenged due to complex newer therapies, including multimodality treatments, and newer emergent broader considerations such as, oncogeriatrics, genetic counselling, and survivorship issues which should have a central place for consideration in the MDT.
KW - Cancer
KW - Cancer care
KW - Decision-making
KW - Genitourinary
KW - Multidisciplinary teams
KW - Patient outcomes
KW - Review
KW - Systematic
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85115984855&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.ejon.2021.102032
DO - 10.1016/j.ejon.2021.102032
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85115984855
SN - 1462-3889
VL - 54
SP - 1
EP - 9
JO - European Journal of Oncology Nursing
JF - European Journal of Oncology Nursing
M1 - 102032
ER -