Technology enhanced multidisciplinary cancer conferences in gynecologic oncology.

Abstract

e13652 Background: Multidisciplinary Cancer Conferences (MCCs) improve quality of care and patient outcomes. The goals of our study were to investigate the impact of an information technology platform, Navify Tumor Board Solution (NTBS) on the (1) efficiency of preparing and conducting MCCs and (2) educational quality of the gynecologic oncology MCCs. Methods: We conducted a prospective, mixed methods study involving participants of the biweekly gynecologic oncology MCC at a comprehensive cancer center. NTBS was introduced to the gynecologic oncology MCC for the preparation and presentation of tumor board cases. Data were collected before and after the introduction of NTBS. We used a validated observational tool to assess the impact of the platform on the quality of case presentation and discussion, as well as decision making (as measured by a composite mean score). We also evaluated compliance of care plans with national guidelines, changes in care plans, and concordance of actual treatment received with MCC recommendations. The survey consisted of five qualitative and two demographic questions. Interviews lasting 10 minutes were recorded using Microsoft Teams. Analyses were conducted using SAS v9.4 (Cary, NC) and Dedoose v9.0.17, (Los Angeles, CA). Results: Pre- and Post-NTBS cohorts consisted of 49 and 60 patients, respectively. When comparing pre- versus post-NTBS cohorts, there was a difference in the mean composite score (50.57 vs 54.11; p=0.016). While there was no statistical difference between cohorts, patient care plans were changed in 13% of the cases and were 92% concordant with treatment received. Additionally, MCC recommendations were 100% compliant with national guidelines. Surveys of 13 MCC participants revealed that post-NTBS, the presentation format was more cohesive, concise, and structured. Common themes from gynecologic oncology fellows’ responses included improvement of case preparation time and simplified process while using NTBS. However, trainees reported limited use of NTBS features, difficulty incorporating graphical, and lack of a comprehensive list of NCCN guidelines. All respondents had educational goals for their participation and reported a high educational value of the MCC. These goals included knowledge acquisition of clinical diagnosis, management of standard of care versus complex situations, sentinel clinical trials underlying NCCN treatment guidelines, primary literature review, management of preparation time and flow of discussion, and preparation for oral boards. Conclusions: NTBS contributed positively to the gynecologic oncology MCC and clinical care for patients. Overall, NTBS had a positive impact on case formatting, preparation time and quality of trainee education. Comprehensive user training in the NTBS features could further enhance its utilization within the MCC.