Back to Search Start Over

Implementation of 11 system-wide, disease-specific, multidisciplinary tumor boards connecting 24 hospitals in an integrated health care system

Authors :
Jane Jensen
Jodie Miles
Tawnya L. Bowles
Timothy J. Yeatman
Daanish Hoda
Derrick S. Haslem
Margaret Elizabeth McCormick Van Meter
Brandon M. Barney
Mark W. Dodson
Ivan Zendejas
Clarke A. Low
Vilija N. Avizonis
David Gill
Mark A. Lewis
G.K. Hunter
Paul Urie
Allison Tonkin
Craig Nielsen
Brook Clayton
Source :
Journal of Clinical Oncology. 38:e19152-e19152
Publication Year :
2020
Publisher :
American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), 2020.

Abstract

e19152 Background: Cancer treatment is becoming more complex, necessitating subspecialty expertise and multidisciplinary approaches to treatment planning. Simultaneously, there is increasing demand to provide care as close to home as possible. While tumor boards have long been an institutional backbone to providing high-quality multidisciplinary care in tertiary facilities, connecting several hospitals and dozens of cancer specialists in a large integrated healthcare system is unique and potentially transformational for smaller facilities and communities. Methods: Using highly-secure, network firewall-protected Cisco Telepresence and WebEx capabilities, 11 disease specific tumor boards (Breast, GI, Sarcoma, GU, Thoracic, Head/Neck, Melanoma, Neuro, Heme, Hepatobiliary, Gyn) were organized across Intermountain Healthcare’s 24 geographically and medically diverse hospitals spanning over 500 miles. Meetings for each of these disease-specific tumor boards have been held at least every 1-2 weeks, at set times and days since July 2019. Cases are submitted to the appropriate tumor board by individual providers from anywhere in the system. Submitted cases are reviewed by a designated subspeciality leader. Cases are either added to the system-wide agenda, or at times, the clinical decision can be resolved immediately. Included cases’ records including pathology, radiology and pertinent medical history are obtained for display and discussion. After each tumor board, recommendations and conclusions are recorded by nurse navigators for future review and consultation. Results: From July 2019 to February 2020, 1,598 patient cases were discussed. Just as relevant, 293 unique oncology providers (surgeons, medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, genetic counselors, nurse navigators, and therapists) participated in tumor board discussions. These deliberations provided insight, experience and recommendations directly related to patient care. Conclusions: Our system-wide, disease-specific, multi-disciplinary tumor boards are useful in connecting oncology providers and subspecialists. This effort has led to better collaboration, coordination and delivery of high-quality cancer care to patients throughout a large healthcare system that includes thousands of patients and dozens of cancer providers in smaller/rural communities. In addition, provider engagement has improved. Work is ongoing to prospectively evaluate the effects on treatment decisions and clinical outcomes.

Details

ISSN :
15277755 and 0732183X
Volume :
38
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Accession number :
edsair.doi...........e62078d7d90d72d548a87e2ee694e28e