Multidisciplinary team meetings in community mental health: a systematic review of their functions

Purpose – Previous research has identified a need for greater clarity regarding the functions of multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings in UK community mental health services. The purpose of this paper is to identify the functions of these meetings by systematically reviewing both primary research and academic discussion papers. Design/methodology/approach – Papers relating to adult community mental health teams (CMHTs) in the UK and published between September 1999 and February 2014 were reviewed and appraised using NICE quality checklists. The search was broad in scope to include both general CMHTs and specialist CMHTs such as early intervention psychosis services and forensic mental health teams. A thematic synthesis of the findings was performed to develop an overarching thematic framework of the reported functions of MDT meetings. Findings – None of the 4,046 studies identified directly investigated the functions of MDT meetings. However, 49 mentioned functions in passing. These functions were categorised into four thematic domains: discussing the care of individual patients, teamwork, team management and learning and development. Several papers reported a lack of clarity about the purpose of MDT meetings and the roles of different team members which hindered effective collaboration. Practical implications – Without clearly agreed objectives for MDT meetings, monitoring their effectiveness is problematic. Unwarranted variation in their functioning may undermine the quality of care. Originality/value – This is the first systematic review to investigate the functions of CMHT MDT meetings in the UK. The findings highlight a need for empirical research to establish how MDT meetings are being used so that their effectiveness can be understood, monitored and evaluated

Determinants of treatment plan implementation in multidisciplinary team meetings for patients with chronic diseases: a mixed-methods study.

This is the final version of the article. Available from the publisher via the DOI in this record.OBJECTIVE: Multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings are assumed to produce better decisions and are extensively used to manage chronic disease in the National Health Service (NHS). However, evidence for their effectiveness is mixed. Our objective was to investigate determinants of MDT effectiveness by examining factors influencing the implementation of MDT treatment plans. This is a proxy measure of effectiveness, because it lies on the pathway to improvements in health, and reflects team decision making which has taken account of clinical and non-clinical information. Additionally, this measure can be compared across MDTs for different conditions. METHODS: We undertook a prospective mixed-methods study of 12 MDTs in London and North Thames. Data were collected by observation of 370 MDT meetings, interviews with 53 MDT members, and from 2654 patient medical records. We examined the influence of patient-related factors (disease, age, sex, deprivation, whether their preferences and other clinical/health behaviours were mentioned) and MDT features (as measured using the 'Team Climate Inventory' and skill mix) on the implementation of MDT treatment plans. RESULTS: The adjusted odds (or likelihood) of implementation was reduced by 25% for each additional professional group represented at the MDT meeting. Implementation was more likely in MDTs with clear goals and processes and a good 'Team Climate' (adjusted OR 1.96; 95% CI 1.15 to 3.31 for a unit increase in Team Climate Inventory (TCI) score). Implementation varied by disease category, with the lowest adjusted odds of implementation in mental health teams. Implementation was also lower for patients living in more deprived areas (adjusted odds of implementation for patients in the most compared with least deprived areas was 0.60, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.91). CONCLUSIONS: Greater multidisciplinarity is not necessarily associated with more effective decision making. Explicit goals and procedures are also crucial. Decision implementation should be routinely monitored to ensure the equitable provision of care.This project was funded by the NIHR Health Services and Delivery Research programme (project number 09/2001/ 04) and will be published in full in the Health Services and Delivery Research Journal. Further information available at: (http://www.netscc.ac.uk/hsdr/projdetails.php?ref=09-2001-04). In accordance with NIHR regulations, the findings reported here are to be referred to as initial until the NIHR final report has been published. The sponsors of the study had no role in study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, the writing of the report, or the decision to submit the report for publication

Determinants of treatment plan implementation in multidisciplinary team meetings for patients with chronic diseases: a mixed-methods study.

Multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings are assumed to produce better decisions and are extensively used to manage chronic disease in the National Health Service (NHS). However, evidence for their effectiveness is mixed. Our objective was to investigate determinants of MDT effectiveness by examining factors influencing the implementation of MDT treatment plans. This is a proxy measure of effectiveness, because it lies on the pathway to improvements in health, and reflects team decision making which has taken account of clinical and non-clinical information. Additionally, this measure can be compared across MDTs for different conditions

Evaluation of (2S,4S)/(2R,4R) and (2S,4R)/(2R,4S) 6,6-N,N-dimethyl-2-methyl-2-oxo-1,3-dioxa-4-hexadecyl-6,aza-2-phosphacyc looctane bromide as inhibitors for protein kinase C, carnitine octanoyltransferase, and carnitine palmitoyltransferase

(2S,4S)/(2R,4R) and (2S,4R)/(2R,4S) 6,6-N,N-dimethyl-2-methyl-2-oxo-1,3-dioxa-4-hexadecyl-6-aza-2-phosphacyc looctane bromide strongly inhibited protein kinase C and moderately inhibited carnitine octanoyltransferase and carnitine palmitoyltransferase.</p