Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
203,203 studies31 sourcesUpdated 58 min ago
Peer-reviewedCC BY-NC-NDBMC gastroenterology

Influencing factors and individualized intervention strategies for inadequate bowel preparation before colonoscopy in high-risk populations: a review based on the clinical practice of painless colonoscopy in China.

  1. 1The Second Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, 88 Jiefang Road, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, 310009, China.
  2. 2The Second Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, 88 Jiefang Road, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, 310009, China. [email protected].
  3. 3The Second Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, 88 Jiefang Road, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, 310009, China. [email protected].

Abstract

Background

Inadequate bowel preparation (IBP) significantly reduces the diagnostic accuracy of painless colonoscopy and increases complication risks. High-risk populations account for 28% of painless colonoscopy cases in China, with IBP rates ranging from 42% to 62%, but targeted nursing interventions remain underdeveloped.Objective

To systematically analyze IBP-related influencing factors and evaluate the effectiveness of individualized nursing interventions for high-risk populations undergoing painless colonoscopy in China.Methods

Literature searches were conducted across the MEDLINE (via the PubMed interface, Cochrane Library, Embase, CNKI, Wanfang Data, and VIP from January 2020 to April 2024 using keywords related to bowel preparation, high-risk populations, and nursing intervention. Studies on Chinese high-risk populations undergoing painless colonoscopy were eligible if they reported IBP rate, bowel preparation score, or intervention adherence. RCTs, systematic reviews, and clinical guidelines were included. Two reviewers independently screened records, extracted data, and assessed methodological quality using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool, JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist, and AGREE II Instrument. Data synthesis involved descriptive analysis and random-effects meta-analysis.Results

A total of 43 studies (32 RCTs, 7 systematic reviews, 4 guidelines) were included. Six high-risk populations were identified: obese patients (BMI ≥ 28 kg/m²), patients with abdominal/pelvic surgery history, neurological disease patients, long-term medication users, children, and diabetic patients. Key influencing factors included gastrointestinal motility disorders, psychological anxiety, and medication interactions. Individualized interventions (e.g., dose-adjusted laxatives, nurse-led psychological counseling) reduced IBP rates by 23%-48% (pooled OR = 0.36, 95%CI:0.29-0.45, I²=45%).Conclusion

IBP in high-risk populations is driven by multi-dimensional factors. Context-adapted nursing interventions (e.g., WeChat-guided education, parental participation training) significantly improve preparation quality. Standardized protocols for primary hospitals and child-specific regimens are urgently needed. These findings translate into a risk-stratified, nurse-pharmacist-led preparation pathway that can be implemented immediately-especially in primary hospitals-to reduce IBP and improve safety. And these findings pertain to six high-risk populations-obese, post-surgical, neurological disease, long-term medication users, children, and diabetics-as predefined in the Introduction.

Related

  1. Written Recommendation to Repeat Colonoscopy within 1 Year after Inadequate Bowel Preparation: A Simple and Highly Effective Intervention.
    Marta Antón Arnal, Nadine Grima Sopesens, Agustín Seoane Urgorri +11
    Endoscopy international openPeer-reviewedCC BYFull textOncologyEurope PMC
  2. Bowel preparation for colonoscopy in patients with surgically altered anatomy: a narrative review and institutional protocol
    Fouad Jaber, Mark Peicher, Juan D. Gomez Cifuentes +2
    IGIE : innovation, investigation and insightsPeer-reviewedCC BYFull textGeneral medicineEurope PMC
  3. Risk factors for inadequate bowel preparation and quality improvement strategies in colonoscopy: a narrative review
    Shanshan Ma, Xinyu Zhou
    Frontiers in SurgeryPeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Full textOncologyPMC
  4. Bowel preparation for colonoscopy in older adults: a dyadic qualitative study of patient–caregiver challenges and shared needs
    Jing Wang, Fangfang Xu, Meng Yang +1
    Frontiers in Public HealthPeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Epidemiology & public healthFrontiersCrossref
  5. Research progress on bowel preparation regimens before colonoscopy: a narrative review.
    Xiang Liao, Yu Song, Yazhi He +3
    Frontiers in medicinePeer-reviewedCC BYFull textOncologyEurope PMCPMC
BibTeX
@article{lai2026influencing,
  title = {{Influencing factors and individualized intervention strategies for inadequate bowel preparation before colonoscopy in high-risk populations: a review based on the clinical practice of painless colonoscopy in China.}},
  author = {Huibin Lai and Ting Sun and Xiujing Yu},
  journal = {BMC gastroenterology},
  year = {2026},
  month = jul,
  doi = {10.1186/s12876-026-05161-1},
  url = {https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42907990},
  note = {CC BY-NC-ND},
}
RIS
TY  - JOUR
TI  - Influencing factors and individualized intervention strategies for inadequate bowel preparation before colonoscopy in high-risk populations: a review based on the clinical practice of painless colonoscopy in China.
AU  - Huibin Lai
AU  - Ting Sun
AU  - Xiujing Yu
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/07/01
JO  - BMC gastroenterology
DO  - 10.1186/s12876-026-05161-1
UR  - https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42907990
AB  - Background  Inadequate bowel preparation (IBP) significantly reduces the diagnostic accuracy of painless colonoscopy and increases complication risks. High-risk populations account for 28% of painless colonoscopy cases in China, with IBP rates ranging from 42% to 62%, but targeted nursing interventions remain underdeveloped.Objective  To systematically analyze IBP-related influencing factors and evaluate the effectiveness of individualized nursing interventions for high-risk populations undergoing painless colonoscopy in China.Methods  Literature searches were conducted across the MEDLINE (via the PubMed interface, Cochrane Library, Embase, CNKI, Wanfang Data, and VIP from January 2020 to April 2024 using keywords related to bowel preparation, high-risk populations, and nursing intervention. Studies on Chinese high-risk populations undergoing painless colonoscopy were eligible if they reported IBP rate, bowel preparation score, or intervention adherence. RCTs, systematic reviews, and clinical guidelines were included. Two reviewers independently screened records, extracted data, and assessed methodological quality using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool, JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist, and AGREE II Instrument. Data synthesis involved descriptive analysis and random-effects meta-analysis.Results  A total of 43 studies (32 RCTs, 7 systematic reviews, 4 guidelines) were included. Six high-risk populations were identified: obese patients (BMI ≥ 28 kg/m²), patients with abdominal/pelvic surgery history, neurological disease patients, long-term medication users, children, and diabetic patients. Key influencing factors included gastrointestinal motility disorders, psychological anxiety, and medication interactions. Individualized interventions (e.g., dose-adjusted laxatives, nurse-led psychological counseling) reduced IBP rates by 23%-48% (pooled OR = 0.36, 95%CI:0.29-0.45, I²=45%).Conclusion  IBP in high-risk populations is driven by multi-dimensional factors. Context-adapted nursing interventions (e.g., WeChat-guided education, parental participation training) significantly improve preparation quality. Standardized protocols for primary hospitals and child-specific regimens are urgently needed. These findings translate into a risk-stratified, nurse-pharmacist-led preparation pathway that can be implemented immediately-especially in primary hospitals-to reduce IBP and improve safety. And these findings pertain to six high-risk populations-obese, post-surgical, neurological disease, long-term medication users, children, and diabetics-as predefined in the Introduction.
SN  - 1471-230X
ER  -