Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Developing and Testing TEAM (Team Evaluation and Assessment Measure), a Self-assessment Tool to Improve Cancer Multidisciplinary Teamwork

  • Healthcare Policy and Outcomes
  • Published:
Annals of Surgical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Cancer multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) are well established worldwide and are an expensive resource yet no standardised tools exist to measure performance. We aimed to develop and test an MDT self-assessment tool underpinned by literature review and consensus from over 2000 UK MDT members about the “characteristics of an effective MDT.”

Methods

Questionnaire items relating to all characteristics of MDTs (particularly Leadership and Chairing; Teamworking and Culture; Patient-centred care; Clinical decision-making process; and Organisation and administration during meetings) were developed by an expert panel. Acceptability, feasibility and psychometric properties were tested by online completion of the questionnaire by 23 MDTs from 4 UK NHS Trusts followed by interviews with 74 team members including members from all teams and nonresponders. 10 of the MDTs also completed questionnaires that directly translated each characteristic to an item (for the five domains above) to test content validity.

Results

A total of 47 items were created, each rated for agreement on a 5-point scale. A total of 329 (52 %) of 637 team members completed the questionnaire, including representation from medical, nursing and clerical MDT members. Responses correlated well with domain-specific questionnaires (r > 0.67, p = 0.01), most domain-scales had acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach alpha > 0.60), and good item discrimination (majority of items r < 0.20). Team members were positive about its value.

Conclusions

Self-assessment of team performance using this tool may support MDT development.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Saini KS, Taylor C, Ramirez AJ, et al. Role of the multidisciplinary team in breast cancer management: results from a large international survey involving 39 countries. Ann Oncol. 2011;23:853–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Kane B, Luz S, O’Briain DS, McDermott R. Multidisciplinary team meetings and their impact on workflow in radiology and pathology departments. BMC Med. 2007;5:15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Taylor C, Munro AJ, Glynne-Jones R, et al. 2010 Multidisciplinary team working in cancer: where are we now? BMJ. 2007;340:c951.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Department of Health. Manual for cancer services. London: Department of Health; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  5. National Cancer Action Team. National Cancer Peer Review Programme. Report, 2009/2010: an overview of the findings from the 2009/2010 National Cancer Peer Review of cancer services in England. London: National Cancer Action Team; 2010.

  6. Lamb B, Brown K, Nagpal K, Vincent C, Green JSA, Sevdalis N. Quality of care management decisions by multidisciplinary cancer teams: a systematic review Ann Surg Oncol. 2011;18:2116–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Lamb BW, Green JSA, Sevdalis N. Decision-making in surgical oncology. Surg Oncol. 2011;20:163–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Davies AR, Deans DA, Penman I, et al. The multidisciplinary team meeting improves staging accuracy and treatment selection for gastro-esophageal cancer. Dis Esophagus. 2006;19:496–503.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Coory M, Gkolia P, Yang I, Bowman R, Fong K. Systematic review of multidisciplinary teams in the management of lung cancer. Lung Cancer. 2008;60:14–21.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Burton S, Brown G, Daniels IR, Norman AR, Mason B, Cunningham D. MRI directed multidisciplinary team preoperative treatment strategy: the way to eliminate positive circumferential margins? Br J Cancer. 2006;94:351–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Haward R, Amir Z, Borrill C, et al. Breast cancer teams: the impact of constitution, new cancer workload, and methods of operation on their effectiveness. Br J Cancer. 2003;89:15–22.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Lanceley AS, Savage J, Menon U, Jacobs I. Influences on multidisciplinary team decision-making. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2008;18:215–22.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Kidger J, Murdoch J, Donovan JL, Blazeby JM. Clinical decision-making in a multidisciplinary gynaecological cancer team: a qualitative study. BJOG. 2009;116:511–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Leo F, Venissac N, Poudenx M, Otto J, Mourox J; Groupe d’Oncologie Thoracique Azureen (GOThA). Multidisciplinary management of lung cancer: how to test its efficacy? J Thorac Oncol. 2007;2:69–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Stalfors J, Lundberg C, Westin T. Quality assessment of a multidisciplinary tumour meeting for patients with head and neck cancer. Acta Otolaryngol (Stockh). 2007;127:82–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Blazeby JM, Wilson L, Metcalfe C, Nicklin J, English R, Donovan JL. Analysis of clinical decision-making in multidisciplinary cancer teams. Ann Oncol. 2006;17:457–60.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Lamb BW, Sevdalis N, Arora S, Pinto A, Vincent C, Green JS. Teamwork and team decision-making at multidisciplinary cancer conferences: barriers, facilitators, and opportunities for improvement. World J Surg. 2011;35:1970–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Vincent C, Moorthy K, Sarker SK, Chang A, Darzi AW. Systems approaches to surgical quality and safety: from concept to measurement. Ann Surg. 2004;239:475–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Hull L, Arora S, Aggarwal R, Darzi A, Vincent C, Sevdalis N. The impact of nontechnical skills on technical performance in surgery: a systematic review. J Am Coll Surg. 2012;214:214–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Hull L, Arora S, Kassab E, Kneebone RL, Sevdalis N. Observational Teamwork Assessment for Surgery (OTAS): content validation and tool refinement. J Am Coll Surg. 2011;212:234–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Undre S, Koutantji M, Sevdalis N, et al. Multi-disciplinary crisis simulations: the way forward for training surgical teams. World J Surg. 2007;31:1843–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. McCulloch P, Rathbone J, Catchpole K. Interventions to improve teamwork and communications among healthcare staff. Br J Surg. 2011;98:469–79.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Lamb BW, Sevdalis N, Mostafid H, Vincent C, Green JSA. Quality improvement in multidisciplinary cancer teams: an investigation of teamwork and clinical decision-making and cross-validation of assessments. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011;18:3535–43.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Jamtvedt G, Young JM, Kristoffersen DT, Thomson O’Brien MA, Oxman AD. Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2003;(3):CD000259.

  25. Taylor C, Ramirez AJ. Multidisciplinary team members’ views about MDT working: results from a survey commissioned by the National Cancer Action Team. London: National Cancer Action Team; 2009. http://www.ncin.org.uk/mdt.

  26. National Cancer Action Team. The characteristics of an effective multidisciplinary team. London: National Cancer Action Team; 2010. http://www.ncin.org.uk/mdt.

  27. Fleissig A, Jenkins V, Catt S, Fallowfield L. Multidiscpilinary teams in cancer care: are they effective in the UK? Lancet Oncol. 2006;7:935–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Abell N, Springer DW, Kamata A. Developing and validating rapid assessment instruments. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2009.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  29. Spector PE. Summated rating scale construction. London: Sage Publications; 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Cortina JM. What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. J Appl Psychol. 1993;78:98–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Taylor C, Brown KB, Sevdalis N, Green JSA. Developing and testing a novel, evidence-based and user-tested toolkit for assessing and improving teamworking in multidisciplinary cancer teams (abstract). Paper presented at: European Cancer Congress Stockholm, September 25, 2011. http://new.ecco-org.eu/ecco_content/StockholmAbstractbook/index.html.

  32. Yun GW, Trumbo CW. Comparative response to a survey executed by post, e-mail, and Web form. J Comp Mediat Commun. 2000;6(1).

Download references

Acknowledgment

We thank the team members who participated in the development and testing of TEAM (as part of testing MDT-FIT) and the Trust personnel who facilitated their involvement; other affiliate members of Green Cross Medical Ltd who have supported this work; and the NCAT MDT Development steering group and subcommittee members for their input and comments. Supported in part by the NCAT. Sevdalis, Brown, and Lamb are also affiliated with the Imperial Centre for Patient Safety and Service Quality, which is funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Florence Nightingale School of Nursing and Midwifery, King’s College London, London, England

    C. Taylor MA & J. Harris MSc

  2. Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, England

    K. Brown PhD, B. Lamb MRCS & N. Sevdalis PhD

  3. Department of Urology, Whipps Cross University Hospital, London, England

    B. Lamb MRCS & J. S. A. Green FRCS

  4. Faculty of Health and Social Care, London South Bank University, London, England

    J. S. A. Green FRCS

Authors
  1. C. Taylor MA
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. K. Brown PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. B. Lamb MRCS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. J. Harris MSc
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. N. Sevdalis PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. J. S. A. Green FRCS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to C. Taylor MA.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Taylor, C., Brown, K., Lamb, B. et al. Developing and Testing TEAM (Team Evaluation and Assessment Measure), a Self-assessment Tool to Improve Cancer Multidisciplinary Teamwork. Ann Surg Oncol 19, 4019–4027 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-012-2493-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-012-2493-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation