Literature DB >> 21044332

User's perspectives of barriers and facilitators to implementing quality colonoscopy services in Canada: a study protocol.

Gilles Jobin1, Marie Pierre Gagnon, Bernard Candas, Catherine Dubé, Anis Ben Abdeljelil, Sonya Grenier.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) represents a serious and growing health problem in Canada. Colonoscopy is used for screening and diagnosis of symptomatic or high CRC risk individuals. Although a number of countries are now implementing quality colonoscopy services, knowledge synthesis of barriers and facilitators perceived by healthcare professionals and patients during implementation has not been carried out. In addition, the perspectives of various stakeholders towards the implementation of quality colonoscopy services and the need of an efficient organisation of such services have been reported in the literature but have not been synthesised yet. The present study aims to produce a comprehensive synthesis of actual knowledge on the barriers and facilitators perceived by all stakeholders to the implementation of quality colonoscopy services in Canada.
METHODS: First, we will conduct a comprehensive review of the scientific literature and other published documentation on the barriers and facilitators to implementing quality colonoscopy services. Standardised literature searches and data extraction methods will be used. The quality of the studies and their relevance to informing decisions on colonoscopy services implementation will be assessed. For each group of users identified, barriers and facilitators will be categorised and compiled using narrative synthesis and meta-analytical techniques. The principle factors identified for each group of users will then be validated for its applicability to various Canadian contexts using the Delphi study method. Following this study, a set of strategies will be identified to inform decision makers involved in the implementation of quality colonoscopy services across Canadian jurisdictions. DISCUSSION: This study will be the first to systematically summarise the barriers and facilitators to implementation of quality colonoscopy services perceived by different groups and to consider the local contexts in order to ensure the applicability of this knowledge to the particular realities of various Canadian jurisdictions. Linkages with strategic partners and decision makers in the realisation of this project will favour the utilisation of its results to support strategies for implementing quality colonoscopy services and CRC screening programs in the Canadian health system.

Entities:  

Year:  2010        PMID: 21044332      PMCID: PMC2988067          DOI: 10.1186/1748-5908-5-85

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Implement Sci        ISSN: 1748-5908            Impact factor:   7.327


  56 in total

Review 1.  Why don't physicians follow clinical practice guidelines? A framework for improvement.

Authors:  M D Cabana; C S Rand; N R Powe; A W Wu; M H Wilson; P A Abboud; H R Rubin
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1999-10-20       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  Colorectal cancer screening. Recommendation statement from the Canadian task force on preventive health care.

Authors: 
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 3.275

3.  Bringing 'the public' into health technology assessment and coverage policy decisions: from principles to practice.

Authors:  Julia Abelson; Mita Giacomini; Pascale Lehoux; Francois-Pierre Gauvin
Journal:  Health Policy       Date:  2006-09-22       Impact factor: 2.980

4.  Prospective evaluation of complications in outpatient GI endoscopy: a survey among German gastroenterologists.

Authors:  A Sieg; U Hachmoeller-Eisenbach; T Eisenbach
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 9.427

Review 5.  Screening for colorectal cancer using the faecal occult blood test, Hemoccult.

Authors:  P Hewitson; P Glasziou; L Irwig; B Towler; E Watson
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2007-01-24

Review 6.  Guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance after polypectomy: a consensus update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer and the American Cancer Society.

Authors:  Sidney J Winawer; Ann G Zauber; Robert H Fletcher; Jonathon S Stillman; Michael J O'Brien; Bernard Levin; Robert A Smith; David A Lieberman; Randall W Burt; Theodore R Levin; John H Bond; Durado Brooks; Tim Byers; Neil Hyman; Lynne Kirk; Alan Thorson; Clifford Simmang; David Johnson; Douglas K Rex
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 22.682

7.  Randomised controlled trial of faecal-occult-blood screening for colorectal cancer.

Authors:  J D Hardcastle; J O Chamberlain; M H Robinson; S M Moss; S S Amar; T W Balfour; P D James; C M Mangham
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1996-11-30       Impact factor: 79.321

8.  Access to specialist gastroenterology care in Canada: the Practice Audit in Gastroenterology (PAGE) Wait Times Program.

Authors:  D Armstrong; A Ng Barkun; Y Chen; S Daniels; R Hollingworth; R H Hunt; D Leddin
Journal:  Can J Gastroenterol       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 3.522

9.  Perforation during colonoscopy in endoscopic ambulatory surgical centers.

Authors:  Louis Y Korman; Bergein F Overholt; Terry Box; Cynthia Kelsey Winker
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 9.427

10.  Barriers and facilitators to implementing shared decision-making in clinical practice: a systematic review of health professionals' perceptions.

Authors:  Karine Gravel; France Légaré; Ian D Graham
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2006-08-09       Impact factor: 7.327

View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  Barriers and facilitators to implementing continuous quality improvement programs in colonoscopy services: a mixed methods systematic review.

Authors:  Bernard Candas; Gilles Jobin; Catherine Dubé; Mario Tousignant; Anis Ben Abdeljelil; Sonya Grenier; Marie-Pierre Gagnon
Journal:  Endosc Int Open       Date:  2015-12-15
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.