Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

What Are the Recommendations to Ensure a Successful Multidisciplinary Team in Rectal Cancer?

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Multidisciplinary Management of Rectal Cancer

  • 1002 Accesses

Abstract

Multidisciplinary team-working aims to ensure all patients achieve prompt access to expert advice, up-to-date treatment and holistic care from relevant professionals with specialist knowledge and skills. This is particularly relevant in rectal cancer, where preoperative radiotherapy and chemoradiation are often delivered according to clinical findings and clinical staging (particularly in terms of the MRI). There are also many different surgical options available with varying levels of radicality and implications for future function and quality of life (QOL).

Multidisciplinary team-working has now been implemented in cancer care systems throughout much of Europe, the USA and Australia and forms a core component of guidelines in all cancer care services. There is almost universal approval for this strategy, despite the fact that there is little evidence for its effectiveness in improving outcomes.

In this chapter, we review the evidence for effective MDT team-working and its impact on outcomes and discuss how the characteristics and structure of the MDT, the team culture, leaders, organisation, setting and local environment influence optimal care for the patient.

This chapter is based on literature searches, analysis of UK national peer review data and results from a national survey of UK MDT members. On Behalf of the Barnet Colorectal Cancer Multidisciplinary Team.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Day F, Pollock C, Brook C, Albus A (2010) Multidisciplinary cancer teams. Crucial for population health. BMJ 340:c2125

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Fennell ML, Das IP, Clauser S, Petrelli N, Sainer A (2010) The organization of multidisciplinary care teams: modelling internal and external influences on cancer care quality. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 40:72–80

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Taflampas P, Christodoulakis M, de Bree E, Melissas J, Tsiftsis DD (2010) Preoperative decision making for rectal cancer. Am J Surg 200(3):426–432

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Augestad KM, Lindsetmo RO, Stulberg J, Reynolds H, Senagore A, Champagne B, Heriot AG, Leblanc F, Delaney CP, International Rectal Cancer Study Group (IRCSG) (2010) International preoperative rectal cancer management: staging, neoadjuvant treatment, and impact of multidisciplinary teams. World J Surg 34(11):2689–2700

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Blazeby JM, Wilson L, Metcalfe C, Nicklin J, English R, Donovan JL (2006) Analysis of clinical decision-making in multi-disciplinary cancer teams. Ann Oncol 17(3):457–460

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Obias VJ, Reynolds HL (2007) Multidisciplinary teams in the management of rectal cancer. Clin Colon Rectal Surg 20(3):143–147

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Lamb BW, Brown KF, Nagpal K, Vincent C, Green JS, Sevdalis N (2011) Quality of care management decisions by multidisciplinary cancer teams: a systematic review. Ann Surg Oncol 18(8):2116–2125, 7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Wood JJ, Metcalfe C, Paes A, Sylvester P, Durdey P, Thomas MG et al (2008) An evaluation of treatment decisions at a colorectal cancer multi-disciplinary team. Colorectal Dis 10(8):769–772

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Morris E, Haward RA, Gilthorpe MS, Craigs C, Forman D (2006) The impact of the Calman-Hine report on the processes and outcomes of care for Yorkshire’s colorectal cancer patients. Br J Cancer 95(8):979–985

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Birbeck KF, Macklin CP, Tiffin NJ et al (2002) Rates of circumferential resection margin involvement vary between surgeons and predict outcomes in rectal cancer surgery. Ann Surg 235:449–457

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Bujko K, Nowacki MP, Nasierowska-Guttmejer A et al (2004) Sphincter preservation following preoperative radiotherapy for rectal cancer: report of a randomized trial comparing short-term radiotherapy vs. conventionally fractionated radiochemotherapy. Radiother Oncol 72:15–24

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. National Cancer Action Team (2008) National Cancer Peer Review Programme 2004–2007. National report: an overview of the findings from the Second National Round of Peer Reviews of Cancer Services in England. National Cancer Action Team, London

    Google Scholar 

  14. Department of Health (2007) Cancer reform strategy. Department of Health, London

    Google Scholar 

  15. National Cancer Action Team (2010) The characteristics of an effective multidisciplinary team (MDT). www.ncin.org.uk/view.aspx?rid=136Accessed date: 16 August 2011

  16. Lamb BW, Wong HW, Vincent C, Green JS, Sevdalis N (2011) Teamwork and team performance in multidisciplinary cancer teams: development and evaluation of an observational assessment tool. BMJ Qual Saf 20:849–856

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Taylor C (2008) Improving the working lives of UK colorectal cancer teams: an evaluation of the Pelican team-based training programme (abstract). National Cancer Research Institute Conference. http://www.ncri.org.uk/ncriconference/2008abstracts/abstracts Accessed date: 16 August 2011

  18. Taylor C, Ramirez AJ (2009) Multidisciplinary team members’ views about MDT working: results from a survey commissioned by the National Cancer Action Team. National Cancer Action Team, London. (www.ncin.org.uk/view.aspx?rid=136). Accessed date: 16 August 2011

  19. Haward R, Amir Z, Borrill C, Dawson J, Scully J, West M et al (2003) Breast cancer teams: the impact of constitution, new cancer workload, and methods of operation on their effectiveness. Br J Cancer 89(1):15–22

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Catt S, Fallowfield L, Jenkins V, Langridge C, Cox A (2005) The informational roles and psychological health of members of 10 oncology multidisciplinary teams in the UK. Br J Cancer 93(10):1092–1097

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Burton S, Brown G, Daniels IR, Norman AR, Mason B, Cunningham D (2006) MRI directed multidisciplinary team preoperative treatment strategy: the way to eliminate positive circumferential margins? Br J Cancer 94:351–357

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. West NP, Morris EJ, Rotimi O, Cairns A, Finan PJ, Quirke P (2008) Pathology grading of colon cancer surgical resection and its association with survival: a retrospective. Lancet Oncol 9:857–865

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Olver IN, Selva-Nayagam S (2006) Evaluation of a telemedicine link between Darwin and Adelaide to facilitate cancer management. Telemed J 6(2):213–218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Warkentin M, Sayeed L, Hightower R (1997) Virtual teams versus face-to-face teams: an exploratory study of a web-based conference system. Decis Sci 28(4):975

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Picker Institute Europe (2005) Is the NHS getting better or worse? An in-depth look at the views of nearly a million patients between 1998 and 2004. Picker Institute Europe, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, Middlesex, UK

    Sujay Shah, Pawan Mathur & Robert Glynne-Jones

Authors
  1. Sujay Shah
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Pawan Mathur
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Robert Glynne-Jones
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert Glynne-Jones .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. , Dept. of Radiation Therapy, Università Cattolica S.Cuore, Largo A.Gemelli 8, Rome, 00168, Italy

    Vincenzo Valentini

  2. Klinik und Poliklinik Innere Medizin IV, Abt. Hämatologie und Onkologie, Universitätsklinikum Halle-Wittenberg, Ernst-Grube-Str. 40, Halle, 06097, Sachsen-Anhalt, Germany

    Hans-Joachim Schmoll

  3. Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, Leiden, 2333 ZA, Netherlands

    Cornelis J. H. van de Velde

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Shah, S., Mathur, P., Glynne-Jones, R. (2012). What Are the Recommendations to Ensure a Successful Multidisciplinary Team in Rectal Cancer?. In: Valentini, V., Schmoll, HJ., van de Velde, C. (eds) Multidisciplinary Management of Rectal Cancer. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-25005-7_34

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-25005-7_34

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-25004-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-25005-7

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation