Poster Presentation Inaugural Victorian Integrated Cancer Services Conference 2013

The development of evidence based guidelines on the conduct of multidisciplinary cancer meetings (MDMs). A modified Delphi study.  (#65)

Bianca Devitt 1 2 , Jennifer Philip 1 2 , Sue-Anne McLachlan 1 2
  1. St Vincent's Hosptial, Fitzroy, Vic, Australia
  2. Department of Medicine, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

Background: Australian guidelines on the conduct of multidisciplinary cancer meetings (MDMs) are largely based on expert opinion. Evidence-based guidelines on the conduct of MDMs were developed based on a literature review and results of a questionnaire survey administered to health professionals and patients across 5 Victorian centres. A Delphi study was performed to refine these guidelines and ensure they are nationally relevant.
Methods: Opinion leaders in the fields of cancer care, health policy and ethics were invited to join an expert panel. Two consecutive multiple-choice and short answer questionnaires pertaining to each guideline were administered according to Delphi methodology. A summary of the evidence relevant to each guideline accompanied the questionnaire. Consensus regarding agreement was defined a priori as 75% of respondents scoring > 7 (using a 9-point likert scale).
Results: 23 experts agreed to participate, 19 responses were received in round 1 (83% response rate). In round 2, 13 responses were received (57% RR). The panel reached consensus on the following proposed guidelines: 1)Discussion at MDM should result in an individualised, evidence based treatment plan agreed to by consensus. 2)Where divergent views exist, each option should be discussed with the patient. 3)The treatment plan should be documented in the medical record using a proforma and disseminated to treating clinicians outside the institution. 4)Documentation should be detailed enough to discuss and institute the MDM teams’ treatment plan 5) patients should be informed of the MDM process but do not need to provide informed consent. Consensus was not achieved regarding the role of MDMs in addressing the supportive care needs of patients.
Conclusions: These are the first Australian guidelines based on empirical evidence informing the conduct of MDMs. Innovative strategies need to be developed to facilitate the integration of the supportive care needs of patients into treatment planning within MDMs.