PURPOSE: The objective of the study was to highlight sources of harm that could negatively affect the lung cancer multidisciplinary team (MDT) activities to reduce the level of risk of each factor. METHODS: A modified Delphi approach was used by a board of multi-health care professionals of the lung cancer MDT to identify the main processes, subprocesses, and risk factors of the multidisciplinary pathway of patients with lung cancer. A semiquantitative matrix was built with a five-point scale for probability of harm (likelihood) and severity of harm (consequences) according to the international risk management standards (ISO 31000-2018). The risk level was calculated by multiplying likelihood × consequences. Mitigation strategies have been identified and applied by the MDT to reduce risks to acceptable levels. RESULTS: Three main processes (outpatient specialist visit, MDT discussion, and MDT program implementation), eight related subprocesses, and 16 risk factors were identified. Four risk factors (25%) were related to outpatient specialist visit, seven (43.75%) to case discussion, and five (31.25%) to program implementation. Overall, two risk factors were assigned a low-risk level (12.5%), 11 a moderate-risk level (68.75%), one (6.25%) a high-risk level, and two (12.5%) a very high-risk level. After the implementation of mitigation measures, the new semiquantitative risk analysis showed a reduction in almost all hazardous situations: two risk factors (12.5%) were given a very low level, six (37.5%) a low level, seven (43.75%) a moderate level, and one (6.25%) a very high level. CONCLUSION: An interdisciplinary risk assessment analysis is applicable to MDT activities by using an ad hoc risk matrix: if the hazard is identified and monitored, the risk could be reduced and managed in a short time.
Interdisciplinary Communication , Lung Neoplasms , Humans , Prospective Studies , Risk Management , Patient Care Team
PURPOSE: A risk assessment matrix is a widely used tool for analyzing, assessing and setting priorities in risk management in many fields. This paper overviews critical variables, advantages, disadvantages, strengths and weaknesses of this tool, according to the ISO 31000 risk management framework. RESULTS: Risk assessment is one of the key stages in the Risk Management Process and involves specific steps: identifying hazards, analyzing and evaluating all possible risks. Several methods are developed to assess risks in the literature. A risk matrix method, also called "decision matrix risk assessment (DMRA) technique", is a systematic approach used to determine the risk level and to compare different risks and define which threats need to be controlled first. The actors involved in risk assessment are called on to manage different issues related to the choice of the most appropriate methodological approach, the assessment of the adequacy of the existing control measures, the articulation of risk consequence domains, the definition of the impact-consequences, the explanation of risk likelihood scales and the development of a risk matrix. CONCLUSION: We highlighted a number of recommendations in order to address these issues, especially useful when healthcare organizations provide insufficient guidance on how to use risk matrices as well as what to do in response to the existing criticisms on their use.
COVID-19 pandemic following the outbreak in China and Western Europe, where it finally lost the momentum, is now devastating North and South America. It has not been identified the reason and the molecular mechanisms of the two different patterns of the pulmonary host responses to the virus from a minimal disease in young subjects to a severe distress syndrome (ARDS) in older subjects, particularly those with previous chronic diseases (including diabetes) and cancer. The Management of the Istituto Nazionale Tumori - IRCCS "Fondazione Pascale" in Naples (INT-Pascale), along with all Health professionals decided not to interrupt the treatment of those hospitalized and to continue, even if after a careful triage in order not to allow SARS-CoV-2 positive subjects to access, to take care of cancer patients with serious conditions. Although very few (n = 3) patients developed a symptomatic COVID-19 and required the transfer to a COVID-19 area of the Institute, no patients died during the hospitalization and completed their oncology treatment. Besides monitoring of the patients, all employees of the Institute (physicians, nurses, researchers, lawyers, accountants, gatekeepers, guardians, janitors) have been tested for a possible exposure. Personnel identified as positive, has been promptly subjected to home quarantine and subdued to health surveillance. One severe case of respiratory distress has been reported in a positive employees and one death of a family member. Further steps to home monitoring of COVID-19 clinical course have been taken with the development of remote Wi-Fi connected digital devices for the detection of early signs of respiratory distress, including heart rate and oxygen saturation.In conclusion cancer care has been performed and continued safely also during COVID-19 pandemic and further remote home strategies are in progress to ensure the appropriate monitoring of cancer patients.
