Logo: to the web site of Uppsala University

Background and purpose: The Measure of Case-Discussion Complexity (MeDiC) tool was created to gauge case complexity at multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTM) forcase selection and prioritization. We aimed to assess applicability and association with MeDiC score and non-compliance with national guideline-recommendations for MDTM referral in a bladder cancer setting.

Material and methods: A modified MeDiC scoring system was applied in 8955 subjects with localized (T1-T4N0M0) or metastasized disease as per the Bladder Cancer Data Base Sweden (BladderBaSe) 2.0. Association between MeDiC score and not being discussed at MDTM was investigated by multivariable logistic regression, and further explored in relation to calendar time period, healthcare region, age at diagnosis and hospital volume.

Results and interpretation: Median total MeDiC score was lower in individuals not being discussed at an MDTM (7.0 Inter Quartile Range [IQR] 6.0-9.0) compared to those who were (8.0 IQR 6.0-10.0). Adjusted odds ratio for not being discussed at an MDTM was 2.1 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.8-2.4) for a MeDiC score in the lower quartile, as compared to the highest quartile, with higher estimates when performing stratified analyses in later calendar years and in specific healthcare regions. Our data indicate that the MeDiC score is applicable in bladder cancer patients, and we identified an association between lower MeDiC score and not being discussed at an MDTM.