Cancer Res Treat.  2017 Oct;49(4):1164-1169. 10.4143/crt.2016.517.

Practice Patterns Regarding Multidisciplinary Cancer Management and Suggestions for Further Refinement: Results from a National Survey in Korea

Affiliations
  • 1Department of Internal Medicine, Kangbuk Samsung Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. sukjoong.oh@samsung.com
  • 2Institute for Health Promotion and Department of Epidemiology and Health Promotion, Graduate School of Public Health, Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea.
  • 3Department of Internal Medicine, Dongguk University Ilsan Hospital, Goyang, Korea.
  • 4Department of Internal Medicine, Veterans Health Service Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.

Abstract

PURPOSE
This study was conducted to explore the process and operation of a cancer multidisciplinary team (MDT) after the reimbursement decision in Korea, and to identify ways to overcome the major barriers to effective and sustainable MDTs.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Approximately 1,000 cancer specialists, including medical oncologists, surgical oncologists, radiation oncologists, pathologists, and radiologists in general hospitals in Koreawere invited to complete the survey. The questionnaire covered the following topics: organizational structure of MDTs, candidates for consulting, the clinical decision-making initiative, and responsibility for dealing with legal disputes.
RESULTS
We collected a total of 179 responses (18%) from physicians at institutions where an MDT approach was active. A surgical oncologist (91%), internist (90%),radiologist (89%),radiation oncologist (86%), pathologist (71%), and trainees (20%) regularly participated in MDT operations. Approximately 55% of respondents stated that MDTs met regularly. In cases of a split opinion, the physician in charge (69%) or chairperson (17%) made the final decision, and most (86%) stated they followed the final decision. About 15% and 32% of respondents were "very satisfied" and "satisfied," respectively, with the current MDT's operations. Among 38 institutional representatives, 34% responded that the MDT operation became more active and 18% stated an MDT was newly implemented after the reimbursement decision.
CONCLUSION
The reimbursement decision invigorated MDT operations in almost half of eligible hospitals. Dissatisfaction regarding current MDTs was over 50%, and the high discordance rates regarding risk sharing suggest that it is necessary to revise the current system of MDTs.

Keyword

Reimbursement; Multidisciplinary; Korea

MeSH Terms

Clinical Decision-Making
Dissent and Disputes
Hospitals, General
Korea*
Specialization
Surveys and Questionnaires

Figure

  • Fig. 1. Satisfaction with how the current multidisciplinary team functioned. p=0.196 between groups. p=0.027 between internists/surgical oncologists versus radiation oncologists/radiologists/pathologists.


Cited by  1 articles

Experiences and Perceptions of Gender Discrimination and Equality among Korean Surgeons: Results of a Survey of the Korean Surgical Society
Jihyeon Choi, Jeong-Eun Lee, Bora Choi, Jungook Kim, Seung Eun Lee
J Korean Med Sci. 2021;36(48):e323.    doi: 10.3346/jkms.2021.36.e323.


Reference

References

1. Gouveia J, Coleman MP, Haward R, Zanetti R, Hakama M, Borras JM, et al. Improving cancer control in the European Union: conclusions from the Lisbon round-table under the Portuguese EU Presidency, 2007. Eur J Cancer. 2008; 44:1457–62.
Article
2. European Partnership Action Against Cancer Consensus Group, Borras JM, Albreht T, Audisio R, Briers E, Casali P, et al. Policy statement on multidisciplinary cancer care. Eur J Cancer. 2014; 50:475–80.
Article
3. Fleissig A, Jenkins V, Catt S, Fallowfield L. Multidisciplinary teams in cancer care: are they effective in the UK? Lancet Oncol. 2006; 7:935–43.
Article
4. Ettinger DS, Wood DE, Akerley W, Bazhenova LA, Borghaei H, Camidge DR, et al. NCCN guidelines insights: non-small cell lung cancer, version 4.2016. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2016; 14:255–64.
Article
5. Benson AB 3rd, Venook AP, Bekaii-Saab T, Chan E, Chen YJ, Cooper HS, et al. Colon cancer, version 3.2014. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2014; 12:1028–59.
6. Ajani JA, D'Amico TA, Almhanna K, Bentrem DJ, Besh S, Chao J, et al. Esophageal and esophagogastric junction cancers, version 1.2015. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2015; 13:194–227.
Article
7. Pfister DG, Spencer S, Brizel DM, Burtness B, Busse PM, Caudell JJ, et al. Head and neck cancers, version 1.2015. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2015; 13:847–55.
Article
8. Kim DY, Lee YG, Kim BS. Survey of Medical Oncology Status in Korea (SOMOS-K): a national survey of medical oncologists in the Korean Association for Clinical Oncology (KACO). Cancer Res Treat. 2017; 49:588–94.
Article
9. Pawlik TM, Laheru D, Hruban RH, Coleman J, Wolfgang CL, Campbell K, et al. Evaluating the impact of a single-day multidisciplinary clinic on the management of pancreatic cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2008; 15:2081–8.
Article
10. Bjegovich-Weidman M, Haid M, Kumar S, Huibregtse C, McDonald J, Krishnan S. Establishing a community-based lung cancer multidisciplinary clinic as part of a large integrated health care system: aurora health care. J Oncol Pract. 2010; 6:e27–30.
Article
11. Hammond DB. Multidisciplinary cancer care in a community hospital setting: challenges and rewards. J Oncol Pract. 2010; 6:281–3.
Article
12. Coory M, Gkolia P, Yang IA, Bowman RV, Fong KM. Systematic review of multidisciplinary teams in the management of lung cancer. Lung Cancer. 2008; 60:14–21.
Article
13. Kesson EM, Allardice GM, George WD, Burns HJ, Morrison DS. Effects of multidisciplinary team working on breast cancer survival: retrospective, comparative, interventional cohort study of 13 722 women. BMJ. 2012; 344:e2718.
Article
Full Text Links
  • CRT
Actions
Cited
CITED
export Copy
Close
Share
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
Similar articles
Copyright © 2024 by Korean Association of Medical Journal Editors. All rights reserved.     E-mail: koreamed@kamje.or.kr