Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32928862›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2020

Non-pharmacological interventions to improve the patient experience of colonoscopy under moderate or no sedation: a systematic review protocol.

Colin Sue-Chue-Lam, Matthew Castelo, Jill Tinmouth, Diego Llovet, Teruko Kishibe, Nancy N Baxter

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Colin Sue-Chue-LamDepartment of Surgery, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-2732-3929
Matthew CasteloDepartment of Surgery, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Jill TinmouthInstitute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Diego LlovetInstitute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Teruko KishibeScotiabank Health Sciences Library, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Nancy N BaxterInstitute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada BaxterN@smh.ca.

Funding

CIHR FDN – 148470
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe patient experience is a critical dimension of colonoscopy quality. Sedative and analgesic drugs are commonly used to improve the patient experience of colonoscopy, with predominant regimens being deep sedation, typically achieved with propofol, and moderate sedation, typically achieved with an opioid and a benzodiazepine. However, non-pharmacological interventions exist that may be used to improve patient experience. Furthermore, by identifying non-pharmacological interventions to increase the quality of patient experience under moderate sedation, jurisdictions facing rising use of deep sedation for colonoscopy and its significant associated costs may be better able to encourage patients and clinicians to adopt moderate sedation. Advancing either of these aims requires synthesising the evidence and raising awareness around these non-pharmacological interventions to improve the patient experience of colonoscopy. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A systematic review will be conducted that searches multiple electronic databases from inception until 2020 to identify randomised controlled trials evaluating what, if any, non-pharmacological interventions are effective compared with placebo or usual care for improving the patient experience of routine colonoscopy under moderate or no sedation. Two reviewers will independently perform a three-stage screening process and extract all study data using piloted forms. Study quality will be assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool V.2.0. Where multiple studies evaluate a single intervention, evidence will be quantitatively synthesised using pairwise meta-analysis, otherwise narrative syntheses will be undertaken. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This is a review of existing literature not requiring ethics approval. The review findings will be included in future efforts to develop an implementation strategy to reduce the use of deep sedation for routine colonoscopy. They will also be published in a peer-reviewed journal, presented at conferences and contribute to a doctoral thesis. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020173906.

Indexed as

AnesthesiaColonoscopyHumansHypnotics and SedativesMeta-Analysis as TopicPatient Outcome AssessmentProcedural SedationSystematic Reviews as TopicHypnotics and Sedativesadult gastroenterologyendoscopygastroenterology

Identifiers

PMID32928862
PMCPMC7488806

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.