Interventions to improve the quality of screening-related colonoscopy: protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
Introduction Colonoscopy quality can vary depending on endoscopist-related factors. Quality indicators, such as adenoma detection rate (ADR), have been adopted to reduce variations in care. Several interventions aim to improve ADR, but these fall into several domains that have traditionally been dif...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2022-11-01
|
| Series: | BMJ Open |
| Online Access: | https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/12/11/e061855.full |
| _version_ | 1811186707527106560 |
|---|---|
| author | Michael A Scaffidi Rishad Khan Samir C Grover Marcus Vaska Darren Brenner Yibing Ruan Nauzer Forbes Rishi Bansal Nikko Gimpaya G I Leontiadis |
| author_facet | Michael A Scaffidi Rishad Khan Samir C Grover Marcus Vaska Darren Brenner Yibing Ruan Nauzer Forbes Rishi Bansal Nikko Gimpaya G I Leontiadis |
| author_sort | Michael A Scaffidi |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Introduction Colonoscopy quality can vary depending on endoscopist-related factors. Quality indicators, such as adenoma detection rate (ADR), have been adopted to reduce variations in care. Several interventions aim to improve ADR, but these fall into several domains that have traditionally been difficult to compare. We will conduct a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials evaluating the efficacies of interventions to improve colonoscopy quality and report our findings according to clinically relevant interventional domains.Methods and analysis We will search MEDLINE (Ovid), PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, Scopus and Evidence-Based Medicine from inception to September 2022. Four reviewers will screen for eligibility and abstract data in parallel, with two accordant entries establishing agreement and with any discrepancies resolved by consensus. The primary outcome will be ADR. Two authors will independently conduct risk of bias assessments. The analyses of the network will be conducted under a Bayesian random-effects model using Markov-chain Monte-Carlo simulation, with 10 000 burn-ins and 100 000 iterations. We will calculate the ORs and corresponding 95% credible intervals of network estimates with a consistency model. We will report the impact of specific interventions within each domain against standard colonoscopy. We will perform a Bayesian random-effects pairwise meta-analysis to assess heterogeneity based on the I2 statistic. We will assess the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework for network meta-analyses.Ethics and dissemination Our study does not require research ethics approval given the lack of patient-specific data being collected. The results will be disseminated at national and international gastroenterology conferences and peer-reviewed journals.PROSPERO registration number CRD42021291814. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-11T13:49:36Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-d7c9a8d792f94ac7bc923f70740047d9 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2044-6055 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-11T13:49:36Z |
| publishDate | 2022-11-01 |
| publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
| record_format | Article |
| series | BMJ Open |
| spelling | doaj.art-d7c9a8d792f94ac7bc923f70740047d92022-12-22T04:20:43ZengBMJ Publishing GroupBMJ Open2044-60552022-11-01121110.1136/bmjopen-2022-061855Interventions to improve the quality of screening-related colonoscopy: protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trialsMichael A Scaffidi0Rishad Khan1Samir C Grover2Marcus Vaska3Darren Brenner4Yibing Ruan5Nauzer Forbes6Rishi Bansal7Nikko Gimpaya8G I Leontiadis91 Division of Gastroenterology, St. Michael’s Hospital, Toronto, Canada1 Division of Gastroenterology, St. Michael’s Hospital, Toronto, Canada1 Division of Gastroenterology, St. Michael’s Hospital, Toronto, CanadaKnowledge Resource Service, Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, CanadaCancer Epidemiology and Prevention Research, Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, CanadaDepartment of Oncology, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada1 Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, CanadaDivision of Gastroenterology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, CanadaDivision of Gastroenterology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, CanadaDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, CanadaIntroduction Colonoscopy quality can vary depending on endoscopist-related factors. Quality indicators, such as adenoma detection rate (ADR), have been adopted to reduce variations in care. Several interventions aim to improve ADR, but these fall into several domains that have traditionally been difficult to compare. We will conduct a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials evaluating the efficacies of interventions to improve colonoscopy quality and report our findings according to clinically relevant interventional domains.Methods and analysis We will search MEDLINE (Ovid), PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, Scopus and Evidence-Based Medicine from inception to September 2022. Four reviewers will screen for eligibility and abstract data in parallel, with two accordant entries establishing agreement and with any discrepancies resolved by consensus. The primary outcome will be ADR. Two authors will independently conduct risk of bias assessments. The analyses of the network will be conducted under a Bayesian random-effects model using Markov-chain Monte-Carlo simulation, with 10 000 burn-ins and 100 000 iterations. We will calculate the ORs and corresponding 95% credible intervals of network estimates with a consistency model. We will report the impact of specific interventions within each domain against standard colonoscopy. We will perform a Bayesian random-effects pairwise meta-analysis to assess heterogeneity based on the I2 statistic. We will assess the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework for network meta-analyses.Ethics and dissemination Our study does not require research ethics approval given the lack of patient-specific data being collected. The results will be disseminated at national and international gastroenterology conferences and peer-reviewed journals.PROSPERO registration number CRD42021291814.https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/12/11/e061855.full |
| spellingShingle | Michael A Scaffidi Rishad Khan Samir C Grover Marcus Vaska Darren Brenner Yibing Ruan Nauzer Forbes Rishi Bansal Nikko Gimpaya G I Leontiadis Interventions to improve the quality of screening-related colonoscopy: protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials BMJ Open |
| title | Interventions to improve the quality of screening-related colonoscopy: protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials |
| title_full | Interventions to improve the quality of screening-related colonoscopy: protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials |
| title_fullStr | Interventions to improve the quality of screening-related colonoscopy: protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials |
| title_full_unstemmed | Interventions to improve the quality of screening-related colonoscopy: protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials |
| title_short | Interventions to improve the quality of screening-related colonoscopy: protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials |
| title_sort | interventions to improve the quality of screening related colonoscopy protocol for a systematic review and network meta analysis of randomised controlled trials |
| url | https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/12/11/e061855.full |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT michaelascaffidi interventionstoimprovethequalityofscreeningrelatedcolonoscopyprotocolforasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials AT rishadkhan interventionstoimprovethequalityofscreeningrelatedcolonoscopyprotocolforasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials AT samircgrover interventionstoimprovethequalityofscreeningrelatedcolonoscopyprotocolforasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials AT marcusvaska interventionstoimprovethequalityofscreeningrelatedcolonoscopyprotocolforasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials AT darrenbrenner interventionstoimprovethequalityofscreeningrelatedcolonoscopyprotocolforasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials AT yibingruan interventionstoimprovethequalityofscreeningrelatedcolonoscopyprotocolforasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials AT nauzerforbes interventionstoimprovethequalityofscreeningrelatedcolonoscopyprotocolforasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials AT rishibansal interventionstoimprovethequalityofscreeningrelatedcolonoscopyprotocolforasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials AT nikkogimpaya interventionstoimprovethequalityofscreeningrelatedcolonoscopyprotocolforasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials AT gileontiadis interventionstoimprovethequalityofscreeningrelatedcolonoscopyprotocolforasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials |