Regionalization of Head and Neck Oncology Tumor Boards: Perspectives of Collaborating Physicians.
Neha B Amin, Kelly M Bridgham, Jessica P Brown, Kelly F Moyer, Rodney J Taylor, Jeffrey S Wolf, Matthew E Witek, Jason K Molitoris, Ranee Mehra, Kevin J Cullen, John C Papadimitriou, Prashant Raghavan, Kyle M Hatten
Author Information
Neha B Amin: University of Maryland School of Medicine Baltimore Maryland USA. ORCID
Kelly M Bridgham: University of Maryland School of Medicine Baltimore Maryland USA.
Jessica P Brown: Department of Epidemiology and Public Health University of Maryland School of Medicine Baltimore Maryland USA.
Kelly F Moyer: Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery University of Maryland School of Medicine Baltimore Maryland USA.
Rodney J Taylor: Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery University of Maryland School of Medicine Baltimore Maryland USA.
Jeffrey S Wolf: Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery University of Maryland School of Medicine Baltimore Maryland USA.
Matthew E Witek: Department of Radiation Oncology University of Maryland School of Medicine, Maryland Proton Treatment Center Baltimore Maryland USA.
Jason K Molitoris: Department of Radiation Oncology University of Maryland School of Medicine, Maryland Proton Treatment Center Baltimore Maryland USA.
Ranee Mehra: Marlene and Stewart Greenebaum Comprehensive Cancer Center University of Maryland School of Medicine Maryland Baltimore USA.
Kevin J Cullen: Marlene and Stewart Greenebaum Comprehensive Cancer Center University of Maryland School of Medicine Maryland Baltimore USA.
John C Papadimitriou: Department of Pathology University of Maryland School of Medicine Baltimore Maryland USA.
Prashant Raghavan: Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery University of Maryland School of Medicine Baltimore Maryland USA.
Kyle M Hatten: Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery University of Maryland School of Medicine Baltimore Maryland USA. ORCID
Objectives: To survey academic and community physician preferences regarding the virtual multidisciplinary tumor board (MTB) for further improvement and expansion. Study Design: This anonymous 14-question survey was sent to individuals that participated in the head and neck virtual MTBs. The survey was sent via email beginning August 3, 2021, through October 5, 2021. Setting: The University of Maryland Medical Center and regional practices in the state of Maryland. Methods: Survey responses were recorded and presented as percentages. Subset analysis was performed to obtain frequency distributions by facility and provider type. Results: There were 50 survey responses obtained with a response rate of 56%. Survey participants included 11 surgeons (22%), 19 radiation oncologists (38%), and 8 medical oncologists (16%), amongst others. More than 96% of participants found the virtual MTB to be useful when discussing complex cases and impactful to future patient care. A majority of respondents perceived a reduction in time to adjuvant care (64%). Community and academic physician responses strongly agreed that the virtual MTB improved communication (82% vs 73%), provided patient-specific information for cancer care (82% vs 73%), and improved access to other specialties (66% vs 64%). Academic physicians, more so than community physicians, strongly agreed that the virtual MTB improves access to clinical trial enrollment (64% vs 29%) and can be useful in obtaining CME (64% vs 55%). Conclusion: Academic and community physicians view the virtual MTB favorably. This platform can be adapted regionally and further expanded to improve communication between physicians and improve multidisciplinary care for patients.
