Provision and quality assurance for head and neck cancer care

Kerawala, C.; Campbell, Alex

doi:10.1054/bjom.2000.0460

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similar time intervals have been reported from another region in Sweden [16] and also internationally [21]. The importance of immediate start of treatment has been identified [17,22] and in UK the NHS has stipulated that all cancer treatment programmes must start within 4 weeks after diagnosis before 2005 [23]. Upper limits for waiting periods have not yet been stipulated in standards or protocols in Sweden.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 57%

Quality assessment of a multidisciplinary tumour meeting for patients with head and neck cancer

Stalfors

Lundberg

Westin

2007

Acta Oto-Laryngologica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Head and neck oncology MDT meetings are held in our region to establish a correct diagnosis and an appropriate treatment plan for each reviewed patient. The quality of these MDT meetings was assessed based on the following factors: How often can a diagnosis, a TNM-classification and a treatment plan be successfully established from the workup presented at the patient's first MDT meeting? And what are the reasons for failure? Further, how often are the TNM-classification altered at treatment start? All patients (n=329) presented at MDT meetings during one year were included prospectively and data were collected in a protocol. As telemedicine recently was introduced to reduce travel, any eventual impact on quality on decisions with regard to telemedicine were also studied. A diagnosis and a treatment plan could be established for 236 (73%) of 324 patients at the first MDT meeting. TNM classification was revised in four patients (1.4%) before treatment. In conclusion, the validity of decisions made at the MDT meeting is satisfactory, but improvements regarding the quality of workups are possible. The mode of presentation of patients at the MDT meeting was not decisive for the quality of decisions regarding diagnosis and treatment plans.

show abstract