Word count: 1,716Declarations: The authors declare no conflicts of interest 2 ABSTRACT Aim: This review aimed to identify whether or not there is evidence to support multidisciplinary team working in rheumatology.Methods: A systematic review was completed using a pre-defined search applied across the databases CINAHL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, DH Data, The Kings Fund and The Cochrane library. The terms Rheumat* OR rheumatology/AND multidisciplinary.mp. OR interdisciplinary* OR interprofessional* were used. Grey literature was hand searched. Report titles, abstracts and full texts were sifted for inclusion by two reviewers. Reports were included if full text was available, they were published in English or had English translation, and the main subject material referenced rheumatology healthcare, multidisciplinary team working and the implications thereof. Single profession contributions were excluded. A narrative synthesis of the data was conducted following a thematic analysis of the literature, which included descriptive characteristics and key findings.Results: 63 key reports were identified of which 20 were clinical practice guidelines, 11 randomised controlled trials (RCTs), 10 reviews, 9 observational studies, 6 pilot studies, 5 qualitative studies, 1 case study and 1 survey. Frequently investigated conditions were rheumatoid arthritis (n=12), general inflammatory arthritis (n=10) or fibromyalgia (n=10). Of the 11 RCTs identified, 9 reported clinical benefit whilst 2 reported no effect with MDT working. Explicit reference to MDT composition was within clinical guidelines only and considered in terms of 'core', 'key', and 'beneficial' members. Conclusion:A range of evidence to support MDT working within rheumatology exists. MDT arrangement can be considered in terms of 'core', 'key' and 'beneficial' membership.

Aim: This review aimed to identify whether or not there is evidence to support multidisciplinary team working in rheumatology.Methods: A systematic review was completed using a pre-defined search applied across the databases CINAHL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, DH Data, The Kings Fund and The Cochrane library. The terms Rheumat* OR rheumatology/AND multidisciplinary.mp. OR interdisciplinary* OR interprofessional* were used. Grey literature was hand searched. Report titles, abstracts and full texts were sifted for inclusion by two reviewers. Reports were included if full text was available, they were published in English or had English translation, and the main subject material referenced rheumatology healthcare, multidisciplinary team working and the implications thereof. Single profession contributions were excluded. A narrative synthesis of the data was conducted following a thematic analysis of the literature, which included descriptive characteristics and key findings.Results: 63 key reports were identified of which 20 were clinical practice guidelines, 11 randomised controlled trials (RCTs), 10 reviews, 9 observational studies, 6 pilot studies, 5 qualitative studies, 1 case study and 1 survey. Frequently investigated conditions were rheumatoid arthritis (n=12), general inflammatory arthritis (n=10) or fibromyalgia (n=10). Of the 11 RCTs identified, 9 reported clinical benefit whilst 2 reported no effect with MDT working. Explicit reference to MDT composition was within clinical guidelines only and considered in terms of 'core', 'key', and 'beneficial' members. Conclusion:A range of evidence to support MDT working within rheumatology exists. MDT arrangement can be considered in terms of 'core ', 'key' and 'beneficial' membership.