Jo Helen E, Corte Tamera J, Moodley Yuben, Levin Kovi, Westall Glen, Hopkins Peter, Chambers Daniel, Glaspole Ian
Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, Australia.
University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
BMC Pulm Med. 2016 Feb 1;16:22. doi: 10.1186/s12890-016-0179-3.
Multidisciplinary meetings (MDM) are the current "gold standard" in interstitial lung disease (ILD) diagnosis and comprise inter-disciplinary discussion of multiple forms of information to provide diagnostic and management outputs. Although bias could be potentially inserted at any step in the discussion process, to date there has been no consensus regarding the appropriate constitution and governance of MDM. We sought to determine the features of ILD MDMs based within ILD centres of excellence around the world.
An internet based questionnaire was sent to twelve expert centres in Europe, North America, and Australia seeking information regarding the structure and governance of their MDM. Data was analysed for consistent themes and points of contrast.
Responses were received from 10 out of 12 centres. Similarities were demonstrated with regards to contributing attendees, meeting frequency and case numbers reviewed. Significant heterogeneity in attendee speciality group type, quantity and method of data presentation, approach to diagnosis formulation and documentation, and information provision was apparent.
The constitution of ILD MDMs differs considerably between expert centres. Such differences may result in discordant outcomes, and emphasise the need for further evidence regarding the appropriate constitution and governance of ILD MDMs.
多学科会诊(MDM)是目前间质性肺疾病(ILD)诊断的“金标准”,包括对多种形式信息进行跨学科讨论,以提供诊断和管理结果。尽管在讨论过程的任何环节都可能存在潜在偏差,但迄今为止,关于MDM的适当组成和管理尚无共识。我们试图确定全球卓越ILD中心内ILD MDM的特征。
向欧洲、北美和澳大利亚的12个专家中心发送了一份基于互联网的问卷,以获取有关其MDM结构和管理的信息。对数据进行分析,找出一致的主题和对比点。
12个中心中有10个回复。在参与会诊的人员、会诊频率和审查的病例数量方面表现出相似性。在参会专业组类型、数据呈现的数量和方法、诊断制定和记录方法以及信息提供方面存在明显的异质性。
专家中心之间ILD MDM的组成差异很大。这些差异可能导致不一致的结果,并强调需要进一步提供关于ILD MDM适当组成和管理的证据。