BACKGROUND: Coordination of care has grown in importance with the advent of new modalities of treatment that require specialized expertise. In cancer care, multidisciplinary approaches have shown improvements in quality of care. Tumor boards may provide a mechanism for improving coordination of care. We evaluated physician and practice characteristics that predict frequency of tumor board attendance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This cross-sectional study used data obtained by surveying physicians of a population-based sample of women with incident breast cancer. Physicians were queried regarding tumor board attendance, specialty [medical oncologist (MO), radiation oncologist (RO), surgeon at a hospital with American College of Surgeons accreditation (ACOSSg) and surgeon without such affiliation (non-ACOSSg)], physician characteristics (gender, race/ethnicity, teaching involvement, patient volume, ownership interest) and practice setting (type, size, reimbursement method). Univariate, bivariate, and multivariate analyses were performed for the dependent variable characterizing provider report of frequency of tumor board attendance. RESULTS: Most surveyed physicians (83%) report attending tumor board weekly (58%) or monthly (25%). Specialty and higher patient volumes are significant predictors of more frequent attendance. Compared with the most prevalent specialty category (low-volume ACOSSgs), high-volume MOs attend more frequently (P = .01) and low volume non-ACOSSgs attend less frequently (P = .00). CONCLUSIONS: Tumor board provides a structure for engaging providers in discussion of cancer cases that is designed to enhance quality of care. Tumor board agendas and formalized institution-wide policies could be designed to engage low-frequency attendees as a means to improve quality measures, promote multidisciplinary care, and potentially improve health outcomes.
BACKGROUND: Coordination of care has grown in importance with the advent of new modalities of treatment that require specialized expertise. In cancer care, multidisciplinary approaches have shown improvements in quality of care. Tumor boards may provide a mechanism for improving coordination of care. We evaluated physician and practice characteristics that predict frequency of tumor board attendance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This cross-sectional study used data obtained by surveying physicians of a population-based sample of women with incident breast cancer. Physicians were queried regarding tumor board attendance, specialty [medical oncologist (MO), radiation oncologist (RO), surgeon at a hospital with American College of Surgeons accreditation (ACOSSg) and surgeon without such affiliation (non-ACOSSg)], physician characteristics (gender, race/ethnicity, teaching involvement, patient volume, ownership interest) and practice setting (type, size, reimbursement method). Univariate, bivariate, and multivariate analyses were performed for the dependent variable characterizing provider report of frequency of tumor board attendance. RESULTS: Most surveyed physicians (83%) report attending tumor board weekly (58%) or monthly (25%). Specialty and higher patient volumes are significant predictors of more frequent attendance. Compared with the most prevalent specialty category (low-volume ACOSSgs), high-volume MOs attend more frequently (P = .01) and low volume non-ACOSSgs attend less frequently (P = .00). CONCLUSIONS:Tumor board provides a structure for engaging providers in discussion of cancer cases that is designed to enhance quality of care. Tumor board agendas and formalized institution-wide policies could be designed to engage low-frequency attendees as a means to improve quality measures, promote multidisciplinary care, and potentially improve health outcomes.
Authors: John D Birkmeyer; Andrea E Siewers; Emily V A Finlayson; Therese A Stukel; F Lee Lucas; Ida Batista; H Gilbert Welch; David E Wennberg Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2002-04-11 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Colin B Begg; Elyn R Riedel; Peter B Bach; Michael W Kattan; Deborah Schrag; Joan L Warren; Peter T Scardino Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2002-04-11 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Steven J Katz; Timothy P Hofer; Sarah Hawley; Paula M Lantz; Nancy K Janz; Kendra Schwartz; Lihua Liu; Dennis Deapen; Monica Morrow Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-01-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: R Chekerov; C Denkert; D Boehmer; A Suesse; A Widing; B Ruhmland; A Giese; A Mustea; W Lichtenegger; J Sehouli Journal: Int J Gynecol Cancer Date: 2007-04-27 Impact factor: 3.437
Authors: Kenneth L Kehl; Mary Beth Landrum; Katherine L Kahn; Stacy W Gray; Aileen B Chen; Nancy L Keating Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2015-04-28 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: Shoko Mori; Cristian Navarrete-Dechent; Tatyana A Petukhova; Erica H Lee; Anthony M Rossi; Michael A Postow; Lara A Dunn; Benjamin R Roman; Vivian T Yin; Daniel G Coit; Travis J Hollmann; Klaus J Busam; Kishwer S Nehal; Christopher A Barker Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2018-10 Impact factor: 11.908
Authors: Danielle E Rose; Diana M Tisnado; May L Tao; Jennifer L Malin; John L Adams; Patricia A Ganz; Katherine L Kahn Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2011-12-15 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: Nagi S El Saghir; Raghid N Charara; Firas Y Kreidieh; Vanessa Eaton; Kate Litvin; Rania A Farhat; Katia E Khoury; Juliana Breidy; Hani Tamim; Toufic A Eid Journal: J Glob Oncol Date: 2015-10-28
Authors: S Hollunder; U Herrlinger; M Zipfel; J Schmolders; V Janzen; T Thiesler; E Güresir; A Schröck; F Far; T Pietsch; D Pantelis; D Thomas; S Vornholt; N Ernstmann; T Manser; M Neumann; B Funke; I G H Schmidt-Wolf Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2018-09-29 Impact factor: 4.430