ReviewEndoscopy international open2016
Barriers and facilitators to implementing continuous quality improvement programs in colonoscopy services: a mixed methods systematic review.
Review in Endoscopy international open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The effectiveness of continuous quality improvement for developing professional practice and improving health care outcomes: a systematic review.Implementation science : IS · 2020Pooled it
- Developing and testing a reflection method for implementation of the informal care guideline in community nursing: Design-based research.Journal of advanced nursing · 2025Article
- Addressing Safety, Quality, and Cost of Care Through a Telehealth Outpatient Transitional Care Model: Protocol for a Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
- Navigating the Second Victim Experience in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and Colonoscopy.JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2025Article
- A scoping review of continuous quality improvement in healthcare system: conceptualization, models and tools, barriers and facilitators, and impact.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Article
- The impact of a simplified documentation method for the Edmonton classification system for cancer pain (ECS-CP) on clinician utilization.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2017Article
- Rheumatologists' perception of systemic lupus erythematosus quality indicators: significant interest and perceived barriers.Clinical rheumatology · 2017Article
- Implementing quality improvement programs for colonoscopy: the emerging need for an international, standardized, multidisciplinary approach.Endoscopy international open · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimContinuous quality improvement (CQI) programs may result in quality of care and outcome improvement. However, the implementation of such programs has proven to be very challenging. This mixed methods systematic review identifies barriers and facilitators pertaining to the implementation of CQI programs in colonoscopy services and how they relate to endoscopists, nurses, managers, and patients.
methodsWe developed a search strategy adapted to 15 databases. Studies had to report on the implementation of a CQI intervention and identified barriers or facilitators relating to any of the four groups of actors directly concerned by the provision of colonoscopies. The quality of the selected studies was assessed and findings were extracted, categorized, and synthesized using a generic extraction grid customized through an iterative process.
resultsWe extracted 99 findings from the 15 selected publications. Although involving all actors is the most cited factor, the literature mainly focuses on the facilitators and barriers associated with the endoscopists' perspective. The most reported facilitators to CQI implementation are perception of feasibility, adoption of a formative approach, training and education, confidentiality, and assessing a limited number of quality indicators. Receptive attitudes, a sense of ownership and perceptions of positive impacts also facilitate the implementation. Finally, an organizational environment conducive to quality improvement has to be inclusive of all user groups, explicitly supportive, and provide appropriate resources.
conclusionOur findings corroborate the current models of adoption of innovations. However, a significant knowledge gap remains with respect to barriers and facilitators pertaining to nurses, patients, and managers.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.