E401: Engagement, Perception, and Knowledge of Multidisciplinary Tumor Boards: A Patient’s Perspective

Multidisciplinary tumor boards (TB) are the standard for multidisciplinary, patient-centered, cancer care. Research studies on TB have focused on clinical outcomes with sparse attention to patient engagement. We performed a prospective survey study to gain insight into patients’ perspectives of TBs and examine the impact of TBs on patient-centered outcomes.

Methods:

A prospective single center survey study was performed enrolling patients with a confirmed diagnosis of GI malignancy or pre-malignancy at an NCI-comprehensive cancer center. Patients were categorized into those presented at a multidisciplinary TB conference (MTB) and those not presented at time of study survey administration (non-MTB). Clinical variables were abstracted from the electronic medical record (EMR). A survey was designed to assess four domains related to TB: 1) Knowledge; 2) Perception; 3) Communication; and 4) Understanding of Disease. Consensus answers on the knowledge section were used to generate a total score of baseline knowledge TBs. The results of each domain were aggregated and compared between groups.

Results:

There were 271 patients approached and 130 responses the survey (54 MDT, 76 non-MDT, response rate = 48%). The median knowledge score was the same between both cohorts (9.0 - IQR 0.0, 13.0 vs. 9.0 IQR 0.0, 12.0, p = 0.03). Within the perception domain, MTB patients were more likely to state they understood the purpose (87% vs. 63%, p < 0.01) and function (66% vs. 39%, p = 0.01) of TBs. They were also more likely to believe that TBs were crucial to their care (84% vs. 64%, p = 0.03) and trust treatment recommendations (85% vs. 70%, p = 0.05). Regarding communication, most patients had TB results communicated through the patient portal (75%) but preferred in-person (52%). More than half (54%) of all patients were interested in education regarding tumor boards. Sixty nine percent stated that they would be interested in receiving a written summary of tumor board results. Patient understanding of their disease was similar between groups, but patients’ perceived stage and treatment goals were discordant with provider documentation in the EMR.

Conclusions:

While knowledge of tumor boards did not vary between groups, patients discussed in TBs had a deeper understanding of the role and function of tumor boards, translating into a higher level of trust with treatment recommendations. Patient participation with multidisciplinary TBs, education, and systematic communication tools for TB decisions can improve the overall patient experience throughout the cancer journey and increase engagement with their care.