Enhancing Multidisciplinary Team Processes in Lung Cancer Care: A Self-Assessment Toolkit and Best Practices
Rattachement africain : pt, gb. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
Multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) play a pivotal role in the comprehensive management of cancer. MDT meetings (MDTMs) bring together specialized experts across the entire patient care spectrum, convening regularly to discuss patient cases, select optimal diagnostic strategies, and determine the most appropriate treatment modalities. By fostering cross-disciplinary interaction, MDTs aim to enhance patient outcomes and elevate the collective proficiency within a health care institution, promoting knowledge dissemination and ensuring health care practitioners remain abreast of the latest clinical insights. This study’s methods comprised an extensive review of existing literature coupled with interviews involving lung cancer MDTs from 24 medical centers across Europe and Canada. The research focused on elucidating dynamics and variations observed among lung cancer MDTs, outlining an optimal MDT process, identifying variances in the study sample, and introducing a comprehensive self-assessment toolkit for continuous evaluation and improvement. The report discusses how these results should be used to self-optimize hospital MDTs, promote standardization, and encourage increased cross-hospital best practices sharing. With this, MDTs will be better positioned to deliver on the key goal of improved patient outcomes while promoting equality of access to health care.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Enhancing Multidisciplinary Team Processes in Lung Cancer Care: A Self-Assessment Toolkit and Best Practices
- Date Crossref
- 01/02/2024
- Éditeur
- HMP Communications, LLC
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.