Cath Taylor1, Jenny Harris1, Karen Stenner1, Nick Sevdalis2, S A James Green2,3. 1. School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK. 2. Centre for Implementation Science, Health Service and Population Research Department, King's College London, London, UK. 3. Barts Health NHS Trust, Urology Network Director, Department of Urology, Whipps Cross Hospital, London, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Globally, Multidisciplinary Teams (MDTs) are considered the gold standard for diagnosis and treatment of cancer and other conditions, but variability in performance has led to demand for improvement tools. MDT-FIT (Multidisciplinary Team Feedback for Improving Teamwork) is an improvement programme developed iteratively with over 100 MDTs (≥1100 MDT-members). Complex interventions are often adapted to context, but this is rarely evaluated. We conducted a prospective evaluation of the implementation of MDT-FIT across an entire integrated care system (ICS). METHODS: MDT-FIT was implemented within all breast cancer MDTs across an ICS in England (n = 10 MDTs; 275 medical, nursing, and administrative members). ICS managers coordinated the implementation across the three stages of MDT-FIT: set up; assessment (self-report by team members plus independent observational assessment); team-feedback and facilitated discussion to agree actions for improvement. Data were collected using process and systems logs, and interviews with a purposively selected range of participants. Analysis was theoretically grounded in evidence-based frameworks for implementation strategies and outcomes. RESULTS: All 10 MDTs participated in MDT-FIT; 36 interviews were conducted. Data from systems and process logs covered a 9-month period. Adaptations to MDT-FIT by the ICS (e.g., coordination of team participation by ICS rather than individual hospitals; and reducing time protected for coordination) reduced Fidelity and Adoption of MDT-FIT. However, the Acceptability, Appropriateness and Feasibility of MDT-FIT remained high due to embedding implementation strategies in the development of MDT-FIT (e.g., stakeholder engagement, interactive support). CONCLUSIONS: This is a unique and comprehensive evaluation of the multi-site implementation of a complex team improvement programme. Findings support the imperative of considering implementation strategies when designing such programmes to minimize potentially negative impacts of adaptations in "real world" settings.
BACKGROUND: Globally, Multidisciplinary Teams (MDTs) are considered the gold standard for diagnosis and treatment of cancer and other conditions, but variability in performance has led to demand for improvement tools. MDT-FIT (Multidisciplinary Team Feedback for Improving Teamwork) is an improvement programme developed iteratively with over 100 MDTs (≥1100 MDT-members). Complex interventions are often adapted to context, but this is rarely evaluated. We conducted a prospective evaluation of the implementation of MDT-FIT across an entire integrated care system (ICS). METHODS:MDT-FIT was implemented within all breast cancer MDTs across an ICS in England (n = 10 MDTs; 275 medical, nursing, and administrative members). ICS managers coordinated the implementation across the three stages of MDT-FIT: set up; assessment (self-report by team members plus independent observational assessment); team-feedback and facilitated discussion to agree actions for improvement. Data were collected using process and systems logs, and interviews with a purposively selected range of participants. Analysis was theoretically grounded in evidence-based frameworks for implementation strategies and outcomes. RESULTS: All 10 MDTs participated in MDT-FIT; 36 interviews were conducted. Data from systems and process logs covered a 9-month period. Adaptations to MDT-FIT by the ICS (e.g., coordination of team participation by ICS rather than individual hospitals; and reducing time protected for coordination) reduced Fidelity and Adoption of MDT-FIT. However, the Acceptability, Appropriateness and Feasibility of MDT-FIT remained high due to embedding implementation strategies in the development of MDT-FIT (e.g., stakeholder engagement, interactive support). CONCLUSIONS: This is a unique and comprehensive evaluation of the multi-site implementation of a complex team improvement programme. Findings support the imperative of considering implementation strategies when designing such programmes to minimize potentially negative impacts of adaptations in "real world" settings.
Authors: Benjamin W Lamb; Katrina F Brown; Kamal Nagpal; Charles Vincent; James S A Green; Nick Sevdalis Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2011-03-26 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Josep M Borras; Tit Albreht; Riccardo Audisio; Erik Briers; Paolo Casali; Hélène Esperou; Birgitte Grube; Marc Hamoir; Geoffrey Henning; Joan Kelly; Susan Knox; Maria Nabal; Marco Pierotti; Claudio Lombardo; Wim van Harten; Graeme Poston; Joan Prades; Milena Sant; Luzia Travado; Vincenzo Valentini; Cornelis van de Velde; Saskia van den Bogaert; Marc van den Bulcke; Elke van Hoof; Ingrid van den Neucker; Robin Wilson Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2013-12-06 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Thomas J Waltz; Byron J Powell; Monica M Matthieu; Laura J Damschroder; Matthew J Chinman; Jeffrey L Smith; Enola K Proctor; JoAnn E Kirchner Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2015-08-07 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: Janneke E W Walraven; Olga L van der Hel; J J M van der Hoeven; Valery E P P Lemmens; Rob H A Verhoeven; Ingrid M E Desar Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2022-06-27 Impact factor: 2.908