European annals of otorhinolaryngology, head and neck diseases · 2015
Guidelines (short version) of the French Otorhinolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery Society (SFORL) on patient pathway organization in ENT: The therapeutic decision-making process.
СтатьяКлинические рекомендацииНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Deneuve S, Babin E, Lacau-St-Guily J, Baujat B, Bensadoun R-J, Bozec A, Chevalier D, Choussy O, Cuny F, Fakhry N, Guigay J, Makeieff M, Merol J-C, Mouawad F, Pavillet J, Rebiere C, Righini C-A, Sostras M-C, Tournaille M, Vergez S
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: The authors present the guidelines of the French Otorhinolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery Society (SFORL) for patient pathway organization in head and neck cancer, and in particular for multidisciplinary team meetings. The present article concerns the therapeutic decision-making process.
METHODS: A multidisciplinary work group was entrusted with a review of the scientific literature on the above topic. Guidelines were drawn up, based on the articles retrieved and the group members' individual experience. They were then read over by an editorial group independent of the work group. The final version was established in a coordination meeting. The guidelines were graded as A, B, C or expert opinion, by decreasing level of evidence.
RESULTS: It is recommended that: an organ specialist should contribute to all multidisciplinary meetings on head and neck cancer; all members of the multidisciplinary meeting should have specific knowledge in head and neck cancer; any referring physician who does not follow the multidisciplinary meeting's advice should justify that decision; there should be sufficient time to prepare, discuss and sum up the cases dealt with in the multidisciplinary team meeting.
METHODS: A multidisciplinary work group was entrusted with a review of the scientific literature on the above topic. Guidelines were drawn up, based on the articles retrieved and the group members' individual experience. They were then read over by an editorial group independent of the work group. The final version was established in a coordination meeting. The guidelines were graded as A, B, C or expert opinion, by decreasing level of evidence.
RESULTS: It is recommended that: an organ specialist should contribute to all multidisciplinary meetings on head and neck cancer; all members of the multidisciplinary meeting should have specific knowledge in head and neck cancer; any referring physician who does not follow the multidisciplinary meeting's advice should justify that decision; there should be sufficient time to prepare, discuss and sum up the cases dealt with in the multidisciplinary team meeting.