Developing and Testing TEAM (Team Evaluation and Assessment Measure), a Self-assessment Tool to Improve Cancer Multidisciplinary Teamwork
- 1.3k Downloads
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.”
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.
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.
Self-assessment of team performance using this tool may support MDT development.
KeywordsTeam Member Item Discrimination Team Assessment Alpha Rating Cancer Team
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).
- 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.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.Google Scholar
- 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.
- 29.Spector PE. Summated rating scale construction. London: Sage Publications; 1992.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).Google Scholar