Involvement of radiologists in oncologic multidisciplinary team meetings: an international survey by the European Society of Oncologic Imaging

Multidisciplinary boards: Survey on the current situation and needs of Spanish radiologists

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

The increasing participation of radiologists in multidisciplinary boards brings about advantages, challenges and specific needs. The aim of this paper is to identify the boards in which radiologists participate and to detect the needs, problems and opportunities that these boards pose for our specialty.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The Spanish Society of Medical Radiology (SERAM) conducted an ad-hoc survey that was distributed among members and through social networks. The results were analysed with Stata® v14.2 (StataCorp, Texas, USA).

RESULTS

Between 15 November 2022 and 24 December 2022, we received 743 anonymous responses with 93.7% coming from SERAM members (642 radiologists and 101 radiology trainees). Among the specialists, 82.7% regularly participate in one or more boards (92.5% oncology/50.7% non-oncology/43.3% both), which implies two or more meetings per week for 41.6% of the respondents. Both radiologists who regularly participate in boards and those who do not, are very positive about this aspect of professional activity and agree on its benefits. However, the specialists who do participate, lack enough allocated time and information to prepare cases prior to the meeting. Although attendance is often recorded (69.7%), it is generally not included in the work plan (20.5% of physicians and 30.8% of middle managers, p = 0.028). Regarding operational functioning, according to 46.9% of respondents there is no record of imaging tests reviewed, and the handling of discrepancies within radiology departments is poor (written recommendations and review sessions are only available to 14.3% and 7.7% of respondents respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The radiologists surveyed report the high impact of multidisciplinary committees on their workload and clinical decisions. They mention a number of problems, some of which are specific to radiology, which can undermine efficiency and safety. These include work organisation, lack of time and problems of accessibility and the recording of imaging tests and other medical record data.

An overview on multimodal imaging for the diagnostic workup of pleural mesothelioma

Pleural mesothelioma (PM) is an aggressive disease that has a strong causal relationship with asbestos exposure and represents a major challenge from both a diagnostic and therapeutic viewpoint. Despite recent improvements in patient care, PM typically carries a poor outcome, especially in advanced stages. Therefore, a timely and effective diagnosis taking advantage of currently available imaging techniques is essential to perform an accurate staging and dictate the most appropriate treatment strategy. Our aim is to provide a brief, but exhaustive and up-to-date overview of the role of multimodal medical imaging in the management of PM.

How to prepare for a bright future of radiology in Europe

Because artificial intelligence (AI)-powered algorithms allow automated image analysis in a growing number of diagnostic scenarios, some healthcare stakeholders have raised doubts about the future of the entire radiologic profession. Their view disregards not only the role of radiologists in the diagnostic service chain beyond reporting, but also the many multidisciplinary and patient-related consulting tasks for which radiologists are solicited. The time commitment for these non-reporting tasks is considerable but difficult to quantify and often impossible to fulfil considering the current mismatch between workload and workforce in many countries. Nonetheless, multidisciplinary, and patient-centred consulting activities could move up on radiologists' agendas as soon as AI-based tools can save time in daily routine. Although there are many reasons why AI will assist and not replace radiologists as imaging experts in the future, it is important to position the next generation of European radiologists in view of this expected trend. To ensure radiologists' personal professional recognition and fulfilment in multidisciplinary environments, the focus of training should go beyond diagnostic reporting, concentrating on clinical backgrounds, specific communication skills with referrers and patients, and integration of imaging findings with those of other disciplines. Close collaboration between the European Society of Radiology (ESR) and European national radiologic societies can help to achieve these goals. Although each adequate treatment begins with a correct diagnosis, many health politicians see radiologic procedures mainly as a cost factor. Radiologic research should, therefore, increasingly investigate the imaging impact on treatment and outcome rather than focusing mainly on technical improvements and diagnostic accuracy alone.Critical relevance statement Strategies are presented to prepare for a successful future of the radiologic profession in Europe, if AI-powered tools can alleviate the current reporting overload: engaging in multidisciplinary activities (clinical and integrative diagnostics), enhancing the value and recognition of radiologists' role through clinical expertise, focusing radiological research on the impact on diagnosis and outcome, and promoting patient-centred radiology by enhancing communication skills.Key points • AI-powered tools will not replace radiologists but hold promise to reduce the current reporting burden, enabling them to reinvest liberated time in multidisciplinary clinical and patient-related tasks.• The skills and resources for these tasks should be considered when recruiting and teaching the next generation of radiologists, when organising departments and planning staffing.• Communication skills will play an increasing role in both multidisciplinary activities and patient-centred radiology.• The value and importance of a correct and integrative diagnosis and the cost of an incorrect imaging diagnosis should be emphasised when discussing with non-medical stakeholders in healthcare.• The radiologic community in Europe should start now to prepare for a bright future of the profession for the benefit of patients and medical colleagues alike.

What is the Value of Radiology Input During a Multidisciplinary Orthopaedic Oncology Conference?

BACKGROUND

Multidisciplinary orthopaedic oncology conferences are important in developing the treatment plan for patients with suspected orthopaedic bone and soft tissue tumors, involving physicians from several services. Past studies have shown the clinical value of these conferences; however, the impact of radiology input on the management plan and time cost for radiology to staff these conferences has not been fully studied.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) Does radiology input at multidisciplinary conference help guide clinical management and improve clinician confidence? (2) What is the time cost of radiology input for a multidisciplinary conference?

METHODS

This prospective study was conducted from October 2020 to March 2022 at a tertiary academic center with a sarcoma center. A single data questionnaire for each patient was sent to one of three treating orthopaedic oncologists with 41, 19, and 5 years of experience after radiology discussion at a weekly multidisciplinary conference. A data questionnaire was completed by the treating orthopaedic oncologist for 48% (322 of 672) of patients, which refers to the proportion of those three oncologists' patients for which survey data were captured. A musculoskeletal radiology fellow and musculoskeletal fellowship-trained radiology attending physician provided radiology input at each multidisciplinary conference. The clinical plan (leave alone, follow-up imaging, follow-up clinically, recommend different imaging test, core needle biopsy, surgical excision or biopsy or fixation, or other) and change in clinical confidence before and after radiology input were documented. A second weekly data questionnaire was sent to the radiology fellow to estimate the time cost of radiology input for the multidisciplinary conference.

RESULTS

In 29% (93 of 322) of patients, there was a change in the clinical plan after radiology input. Biopsy was canceled in 30% (24 of 80) of patients for whom biopsy was initially planned, and surgical excision was canceled in 24% (17 of 72) of patients in whom surgical excision was initially planned. In 21% (68 of 322) of patients, there were unreported imaging findings that affected clinical management; 13% (43 of 322) of patients had a missed finding, and 8% (25 of 322) of patients had imaging findings that were interpreted incorrectly. For confidence in the final treatment plan, 78% (251 of 322) of patients had an increase in clinical confidence by their treating orthopaedic oncologist after the multidisciplinary conference. Radiology fellows and attendings spent a mean of 4.2 and 1.5 hours, respectively, reviewing and presenting at a multidisciplinary conference each week. The annual combined prorated time cost for the radiology attending and fellow was estimated at USD 24,310 based on national median salary data for attendings and internal salary data for fellows.

CONCLUSION

In a study taken at one tertiary-care oncology program, input from radiology attendings and fellows in the setting of a multidisciplinary conference helped to guide the final treatment plan, reduce procedures, and improve clinician confidence in the final treatment plan, at an annual time cost of USD 24,310.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Multidisciplinary orthopaedic oncology conferences can lead to changes in management plans, and the time cost to the radiologists should be budgeted for by the radiology department or parent institution.

Emerging Role of Radiologist in Multidisciplinary Team Meetings

doi: https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.39.4.7645 How to cite this: Arooj S. Emerging Role of Radiologist in Multidisciplinary Team Meetings. Pak J Med Sci. 2023;39(4):919-920.  doi: https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.39.4.7645 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Exploring Radiologists' Burnout in the COVID-19 Era: A Narrative Review

Since its beginning in March 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic has claimed an exceptionally high number of victims and brought significant disruption to the personal and professional lives of millions of people worldwide. Among medical specialists, radiologists have found themselves at the forefront of the crisis due to the pivotal role of imaging in the diagnostic and interventional management of COVID-19 pneumonia and its complications. Because of the disruptive changes related to the COVID-19 outbreak, a proportion of radiologists have faced burnout to several degrees, resulting in detrimental effects on their working activities and overall wellbeing. This paper aims to provide an overview of the literature exploring the issue of radiologists' burnout in the COVID-19 era.

Radiomics in Lung Metastases: A Systematic Review

Due to the rich vascularization and lymphatic drainage of the pulmonary tissue, lung metastases (LM) are not uncommon in patients with cancer. Radiomics is an active research field aimed at the extraction of quantitative data from diagnostic images, which can serve as useful imaging biomarkers for a more effective, personalized patient care. Our purpose is to illustrate the current applications, strengths and weaknesses of radiomics for lesion characterization, treatment planning and prognostic assessment in patients with LM, based on a systematic review of the literature.

Attitudes and perceptions of radiologists towards online (virtual) oncologic multidisciplinary team meetings during the COVID-19 pandemic-a survey of the European Society of Oncologic Imaging (ESOI)

OBJECTIVES

To explore radiologists' opinions regarding the shift from in-person oncologic multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTMs) to online MDTMs. To assess the perceived impact of online MDTMs, and to evaluate clinical and technical aspects of online meetings.

METHODS

An online questionnaire including 24 questions was e-mailed to all European Society of Oncologic Imaging (ESOI) members. Questions targeted the structure and efficacy of online MDTMs, including benefits and limitations.

RESULTS

A total of 204 radiologists responded to the survey. Responses were evaluated using descriptive statistical analysis. The majority (157/204; 77%) reported a shift to online MDTMs at the start of the pandemic. For the most part, this transition had a positive effect on maintaining and improving attendance. The majority of participants reported that online MDTMs provide the same clinical standard as in-person meetings, and that interdisciplinary discussion and review of imaging data were not hindered. Seventy three of 204 (35.8%) participants favour reverting to in-person MDTs, once safe to do so, while 7/204 (3.4%) prefer a continuation of online MDTMs. The majority (124/204, 60.8%) prefer a combination of physical and online MDTMs.

CONCLUSIONS

Online MDTMs are a viable alternative to in-person meetings enabling continued timely high-quality provision of care with maintained coordination between specialties. They were accepted by the majority of surveyed radiologists who also favoured their continuation after the pandemic, preferably in combination with in-person meetings. An awareness of communication issues particular to online meetings is important. Training, improved software, and availability of support are essential to overcome technical and IT difficulties reported by participants.

KEY POINTS

• Majority of surveyed radiologists reported shift from in-person to online oncologic MDT meetings during the COVID-19 pandemic. • The shift to online MDTMs was feasible and generally accepted by the radiologists surveyed with the majority reporting that online MDTMs provide the same clinical standard as in-person meetings. • Most would favour the return to in-person MDTMs but would also accept the continued use of online MDTMs following the end of the current pandemic.

Use of information and communication technologies (ICTs) in cancer multidisciplinary team meetings: an explorative study based on EU healthcare professionals

OBJECTIVES

Multidisciplinary teams in cancer care are increasingly using information and communication technology (ICT), hospital health information system (HIS) functionalities and ICT-driven care components. We aimed to explore the use of these tools in multidisciplinary team meetings (MTMs) and to identify the critical challenges posed by their adoption based on the perspective of professionals representatives from European scientific societies.

DESIGN

This qualitative study used discussion of cases and focus group technique to generate data. Thematic analysis was applied.

SETTING

Healthcare professionals working in a multidisciplinary cancer care environment.

PARTICIPANTS

Selection of informants was carried out by European scientific societies in accordance with professionals' degree of experience in adopting the implementation of ICT and from different health systems.

RESULTS

Professionals representatives of 9 European scientific societies were involved. Up to 10 ICTs, HIS functionalities and care components are embedded in the informational and decision-making processes along three stages of MTMs. ICTs play a key role in opening MTMs to other institutions (eg, by means of molecular tumour boards) and information types (eg, patient-reported outcome measures), and in contributing to the internal efficiency of teams. While ICTs and care components have their own challenges, the information technology context is characterised by the massive generation of unstructured data, the lack of interoperability between systems from different hospitals and HIS that are conceived to store and classify information rather than to work with it.

CONCLUSIONS

The emergence of an MTM model that is better integrated in the wider health system context and incorporates inputs from patients and support systems make traditional meetings more dynamic and interconnected. Although these changes signal a second transition in the development process of multidisciplinary teams, they occur in a context marked by clear gaps between the information and management needs of MTMs and the adequacy of current HIS.

Factors influencing the quality and functioning of oncological multidisciplinary team meetings: results of a systematic review

Background

Discussing patients with cancer in a multidisciplinary team meeting (MDTM) is customary in cancer care worldwide and requires a significant investment in terms of funding and time. Efficient collaboration and communication between healthcare providers in all the specialisms involved is therefore crucial. However, evidence-based criteria that can guarantee high-quality functioning on the part of MDTMs are lacking. In this systematic review, we examine the factors influencing the MDTMs’ efficiency, functioning and quality, and offer recommendations for improvement.

Methods

Relevant studies were identified by searching Medline, EMBASE, and PsycINFO databases (01–01-1990 to 09–11-2021), using different descriptions of ‘MDTM’ and ‘neoplasm’ as search terms. Inclusion criteria were: quality of MDTM, functioning of MDTM, framework and execution of MDTM, decision-making process, education, patient advocacy, patient involvement and evaluation tools. Full text assessment was performed by two individual authors and checked by a third author.

Results

Seventy-four articles met the inclusion criteria and five themes were identified: 1) MDTM characteristics and logistics, 2) team culture, 3) decision making, 4) education, and 5) evaluation and data collection. The quality of MDTMs improves when the meeting is scheduled, structured, prepared and attended by all core members, guided by a qualified chairperson and supported by an administrator. An appropriate amount of time per case needs to be established and streamlining of cases (i.e. discussing a predefined selection of cases rather than discussing every case) might be a way to achieve this. Patient centeredness contributes to correct diagnosis and decision making. While physicians are cautious about patients participating in their own MDTM, the majority of patients report feeling better informed without experiencing increased anxiety. Attendance at MDTMs results in closer working relationships between physicians and provides some medico-legal protection. To ensure well-functioning MDTMs in the future, junior physicians should play a prominent role in the decision-making process. Several evaluation tools have been developed to assess the functioning of MDTMs.

Conclusions

MDTMs would benefit from a more structured meeting, attendance of core members and especially the attending physician, streamlining of cases and structured evaluation. Patient centeredness, personal competences of MDTM participants and education are not given sufficient attention.

Supplementary information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-08112-0.

Structured and shared CT radiological report of gastric cancer: a consensus proposal by the Italian Research Group for Gastric Cancer (GIRCG) and the Italian Society of Medical and Interventional Radiology (SIRM)

OBJECTIVES

Written radiological report remains the most important means of communication between radiologist and referring medical/surgical doctor, even though CT reports are frequently just descriptive, unclear, and unstructured. The Italian Society of Medical and Interventional Radiology (SIRM) and the Italian Research Group for Gastric Cancer (GIRCG) promoted a critical shared discussion between 10 skilled radiologists and 10 surgical oncologists, by means of multi-round consensus-building Delphi survey, to develop a structured reporting template for CT of GC patients.

METHODS

Twenty-four items were organized according to the broad categories of a structured report as suggested by the European Society of Radiology (clinical referral, technique, findings, conclusion, and advice) and grouped into three "CT report sections" depending on the diagnostic phase of the radiological assessment for the oncologic patient (staging, restaging, and follow-up).

RESULTS

In the final round, 23 out of 24 items obtained agreement ( ≥ 8) and consensus ( ≤ 2) and 19 out 24 items obtained a good stability (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The structured report obtained, shared by surgical and medical oncologists and radiologists, allows an appropriate, clearer, and focused CT report essential to high-quality patient care in GC, avoiding the exclusion of key radiological information useful for multidisciplinary decision-making.

KEY POINTS

• Imaging represents the cornerstone for tailored treatment in GC patients. • CT-structured radiology report in GC patients is useful for multidisciplinary decision making.

The concept of the invisible radiologist in the era of artificial intelligence

The radiologists were traditionally working in the background. What upgraded them as physicians during the second half of the past century was their clinical training and function precipitated by the evolution of Interventional Radiology and Medical Imaging, especially with ultrasonography. These allowed them to participate in patient's diagnosis and treatment by direct contact as well asvia multidisciplinary medical consultations. The wide application of teleradiology and PACS pushed radiologists back again which is no longer acceptable, especially in view of the amazing applications of artificial intelligence (AI) in Radiology. It is our belief that clinical radiologists have to be able to control the penetration of AI in Radiology, securing their work for the benefit of both clinicians and patients.

Comparison of Spectral and Perfusion Computed Tomography Imaging in the Differential Diagnosis of Peripheral Lung Cancer and Focal Organizing Pneumonia

Objective

To investigate the spectral and perfusion computed tomography (CT) findings of peripheral lung cancer (PLC) and focal organizing pneumonia (FOP) and to compare the accuracy of spectral and perfusion CT imaging in distinguishing PLC from FOP.

Materials and Methods

Patients who were suspected of having lung tumor and underwent “one-stop” chest spectral and perfusion CT, with their diagnosis confirmed pathologically, were prospectively enrolled from September 2020 to March 2021. Patients who were suspected of having lung tumor and underwent “one-stop” chest spectral and perfusion CT, with their diagnosis confirmed pathologically, were prospectively enrolled from September 2020 to March 2021. A total of 57 and 35 patients with PLC and FOP were included, respectively. Spectral parameters (CT_40keV, CT_70keV, CT_100keV, iodine concentration [IC], water concentration [WC], and effective atomic number [Zeff]) of the lesions in the arterial and venous phases were measured in both groups. The slope of the spectral curve (K_70keV) was calculated. The perfusion parameters, including blood volume (BV), blood flow (BF), mean transit time (MTT), and permeability surface (PS), were measured simultaneously in both groups. The differences in the spectral and perfusion parameters between the groups were examined. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were generated to calculate and compare the area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of both sets of parameters in both groups.

Results

The patients’ demographic and clinical characteristics were similar in both groups (P > 0.05). In the arterial and venous phases, the values of spectral parameters (CT_40keV, CT_70keV, spectral curve K_70keV, IC, and Zeff) were greater in the FOP group than in the PLC group (P < 0.05). In contrast, the values of the perfusion parameters (BV, BF, MTT, and PS) were smaller in the FOP group than in the PLC group (P < 0.05). The AUC of the combination of the spectral parameters was larger than that of the perfusion parameters. For the former imaging method, the AUC, sensitivity, and specificity were 0.89 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.82–0.96), 0.86, and 0.83, respectively. For the latter imaging method, the AUC, sensitivity, and specificity were 0.80 (95% CI: 0.70–0.90), 0.71, and 0.83, respectively. There was no significant difference in AUC between the two imaging methods (P > 0.05).

Conclusion

Spectral and perfusion CT both has the capability to differentiate PLC and FOP. However, compared to perfusion CT imaging, spectral CT imaging has higher diagnostic efficiency in distinguishing them.

The identity and role of the radiologist in 2020: a survey among ESR full radiologist members

Background

Radiologists undertake a wide variety of functions which have altered as technologies have evolved. The aim of this survey was to explore radiologists’ opinions concerning their role and identity in 2020.

Methods

The survey included 124 questions on training, daily work, interaction with colleagues and patients, involvement in teaching, research and management and task delegation. An initial draft was amended following responses from the Presidents of the 48 ESR’s national institutional member societies. The final on-line survey was available to individual ESR full members between January and March 2020. 1344 responses from radiologists in 49 European countries were obtained.

Findings

80% (1049/1317) of radiologists considered a period of non-radiology clinical training mandatory and 92% (1192/1291) felt that sub-specialty expertise was important and improved the visibility of radiologists. 76% (961/1262) of radiologists regularly communicate directly with patients. Only 25% (314/1238) had undergone formal communications training although 82% (1020/1238) felt that this would be beneficial. Radiologists highly value their positive interaction with colleagues, including within multi-disciplinary team meetings, despite limited resources. Difficulties identified included high workload, especially the need to cover general work in parallel with the need to offer subspecialty expertise. 66% (837/1262) felt that lack of visibility to patients is a risk to radiology and professional visibility could be improved by radiology-led research and teaching.

Conclusions

ESR activities should aim to (1) support radiologists with sub-specialty training and maintenance of competencies; (2) develop recommendations for patient communications training and multi-disciplinary working with strong clinical integration; (3) enhance radiologists’ visibility by harnessing opportunities for radiology-led research and education.