IntroductionWhile multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) are well established in many healthcare institutions, both how they function and their role in decision-making vary widely. This study adopted an innovative methodology to assess multidisciplinary team performance and engage teams in performance improvement strategies.MethodsThe study comprised a survey to evaluate MDT members’ perceptions of their team’s performance before the implementation of the programme and annually thereafter, and a maturity matrix designed as a self-assessment tool. Each MDT used the matrix to collectively assess its performance and identify areas for improvement.ResultsIn the first cycle, 180 member surveys from 19 MDTs were completed. This provided insights into team members’ perceptions of performance. 12 of these teams continued with the study and all 12 completed the matrix. Most teams rated themselves at level one or two (low) on a scale of five for most items.ConclusionsThe MDT survey and maturity matrix have the potential to be useful for cancer care teams to identify their strengths and weaknesses and monitor performance over time and also for management to review its performance against standard criteria and to identify priority areas for improvement and further support.

No abstract

Background While multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) are now considered an essential part of cancer care decision-making, how they perform varies widely. The authors hypothesised that a comprehensive, multipronged improvement program, and associated annual member survey, could strengthen MDT performance across a whole cancer service. Methods The study comprised the introduction of a structured program, the Tumour Program Strengthening Initiative (TPSI) linked with an annual survey of member’s perceptions of their performance. Three iterations of the survey have been completed (2017, 2018 and 2019). Generalised estimating equations (GEEs) were used to test for a difference in the proportion of positive survey responses between 2017 and 2019 adjusted for team clustering. Results Twelve teams participated in TPSI. One hundred twenty-nine, 118 and 146 members completed the survey in 2017, 2018 and 2019, respectively. Of the 17 questions that were asked in all three years, nine showed significant improvement and, of these, five were highly significant. Documenting consensus, developing Terms of Reference (TORs), establishing referral criteria and referring to clinical practice guidelines showed most improvement. Questions related to patient considerations, professional development and quality improvement (QI) activities showed no significant change. Conclusions TPSI resulted in sustained and significant improvement. The MDT survey not only allowed MDT members to identify their strengths and weaknesses but also provided insights for management to flag priority areas for further support. Overall program improvement reflected the strengthening of the weakest teams as well as further improvement in highly performing MDTs. Importantly, the initiative has the potential to achieve behaviour change amongst clinicians.

e19200 Background: While multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) are considered the “gold standard” of care for cancer patients, their performance varies widely. This study aimed to develop a user friendly, reliable and valid self-assessment tool for MDTs to evaluate their performance and monitor improvement over time. Methods: Using maturity modelling methodology, key themes from the literature were developed into a 2-dimensional matrix comprising 17 indicators (within 6 components) across 5 levels of performance. A modified Delphi methodology (where 38 MDT members each assigned the contents to components and performance levels using card sorting software) was used to establish face and content validity. A 10 minute on-line version of the matrix was piloted across 11 MDTs. Each participant estimated where they thought the MDT performed for each indicator. Correlation and factor analyses examining convergent and discriminant validity were conducted using SPSS. Cronbach alpha was used to measure internal consistency and evaluate reliability. Ease of use and usefulness were also examined. Results: A total of 109 members completed the matrix, with representation from medical, nursing and allied health professionals. The mean results for each indicator are shown below (maximum 5). Overall results for the different teams varied from 1.2 to 4.2, with standard deviations ranging from 0.4 to 0.8. Conclusions: This matrix has the potential to be a simple, valid and reliable tool for MDTs to measure their performance and monitor improvement over time. The tool will now be refined and then disseminated to a wider audience for further validation and feedback. [Table: see text]

No abstract