{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02028397565922921, 'fraction_numerical': 0.001352265043948614, 'mean_word_length': 5.244725738396625, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
How I Do It: Examining the value of an otology multidisciplinary team meeting

INTRODUCTION Multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTMs) are wellestablished as an important part of patient care in the context of cancer diagnoses. MDTMs are more recently being employed in some specialties to discuss complex noncancer diagnoses, for example, for heart failure and stroke, in addition to the regular oncological meetings. Multidisciplinary team (MDT) working and decision making confers several benefits to the patient; however, it requires a significant amount of preparation, coordination, and resources. As such, it is important to evaluate any MDTM to assess its success in delivering its goals. At present, there is no published literature examining use of a regular MDTM in otology. Within our department, a MDTM for complex otology cases has been created and running for over 10 years. Cases are selected by surgeons, radiologists, and audiovestibular physicians as requiring input from an MDT. Benign pathology MDTs currently are not a nationally mandated element of patient care, and consequently are not always well supported with regard to staffing and funding. We wanted to determine the current perceptions of our otology MDTM and thus whether it is justifiable to continue delivery in its current form. We surveyed all those invited to the otology MDTM to ascertain perceived benefits or disadvantages to the individual practitioner, patient, and team as a group. METHODS