Krupinski Elizabeth A, Comas Merce, Gallego Leia Garrote
Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Department of Epidemiology and Evolution, Hospital Del Mar Medical Research Institute (IMIM), Barcelona, Spain.
J Pathol Inform. 2018 Jul 19;9:26. doi: 10.4103/jpi.jpi_16_18. eCollection 2018.
Workflow and preparation for holding multidisciplinary cancer case reviews (i.e., Tumor Boards) is time-consuming and cumbersome. Use of a software platform might improve this process. This pilot study assessed the impact of a new software platform on tumor board preparation workflow and user satisfaction compared to current methods.
Using current methods and the NAVIFY Tumor Board Solution, this study assessed the number of tasks and time to prepare tumor board cases. Participants completed online surveys assessing ease of use and satisfaction with current and new platforms.
A total of 41 sessions included two surgeons, two oncologists, two pathologists, and two radiologists preparing tumor board cases with 734 tasks were recorded. Overall, there was no difference in the number of tasks using either preparation method (341 current, 393 NAVIFY Tumor Board solution). There was a significant difference in overall preparation time as a function of specialty ( = 71.74, < 0.0001), with oncologists, radiologists, and surgeons having reduced times with NAVIFY Tumor Board solution compared to the current platform and pathologists having equivalent times. There was a significant difference ( = 38.98, < 0.0001) for times as a function of task category. Review of clinical course data and other preparation tasks decreased significantly, but pathology and radiology review did not differ significantly. The new platform received higher ratings than the current methods on all survey questions regarding the ease of use and satisfaction.
The study supported the hypothesis that the new software platform can improve Tumor Board preparation. Further study is needed to assess the impact of this platform in different hospitals, different data storage systems, with different observers, and different types of Tumor board cases as well as its impact on the quality of the tumor board discussion.
开展多学科癌症病例评审(即肿瘤委员会会议)的工作流程和准备工作既耗时又繁琐。使用软件平台可能会改善这一过程。本前瞻性研究评估了一种新软件平台与当前方法相比,对肿瘤委员会会议准备工作流程和用户满意度的影响。
本研究使用当前方法和NAVIFY肿瘤委员会解决方案,评估准备肿瘤委员会病例的任务数量和时间。参与者完成在线调查,评估对当前和新平台的易用性和满意度。
共记录了41次会议,其中包括两名外科医生、两名肿瘤学家、两名病理学家和两名放射科医生准备肿瘤委员会病例,共734项任务。总体而言,使用两种准备方法的任务数量没有差异(当前方法341项,NAVIFY肿瘤委员会解决方案393项)。总体准备时间因专业不同存在显著差异(F = 71.74,P < 0.0001),与当前平台相比,肿瘤学家、放射科医生和外科医生使用NAVIFY肿瘤委员会解决方案的时间减少,病理学家的时间相当。时间因任务类别不同存在显著差异(F = 38.98,P < 0.0001)。临床病程数据审查和其他准备任务的时间显著减少,但病理和放射学审查时间无显著差异。在所有关于易用性和满意度的调查问题上,新平台的评分均高于当前方法。
该研究支持了新软件平台可改善肿瘤委员会会议准备工作这一假设。需要进一步研究,以评估该平台在不同医院、不同数据存储系统、不同观察者以及不同类型肿瘤委员会病例中的影响,以及其对肿瘤委员会讨论质量的影响。