Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
203,203 studies31 sourcesUpdated 21 min ago
Peer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Frontiers in Surgery

Risk factors for inadequate bowel preparation and quality improvement strategies in colonoscopy: a narrative review

  1. 1Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center Gansu Hospital (Gansu Provincial Cancer Hospital), Lanzhou, China

Abstract

Colonoscopy is the gold-standard screening test for colorectal cancer, yet its diagnostic yield relies heavily on adequate bowel preparation. Despite standard protocols, 20%–30% of procedures still have inadequate cleansing, which lowers adenoma detection, prolongs procedures, increases repeat examinations, and wastes resources. Preparation quality is influenced by multiple interacting factors: patient characteristics (age, comorbidities, medication use, adherence), regimen features (purgative type, dose, split-dose scheduling), and healthcare delivery (education quality, appointment timing). Most previous studies have examined these factors in isolation, leaving a gap in integrated, evidence-based guidance. This narrative review synthesizes current knowledge on determinants of preparation quality, with emphasis on emerging strategies such as risk-stratified protocols, low-volume purgatives, digital health tools (mobile apps, SMS reminders), and AI-based real-time assessment. We aim to provide a practical framework for individualized preparation, thereby improving both the efficiency and quality of colonoscopy-based screening.

Related

  1. 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.
    Huibin Lai, Ting Sun, Xiujing Yu
    BMC gastroenterologyPeer-reviewedCC BY-NC-NDFull textOncologyEurope PMCDOAJ
  2. 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
  3. 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
  4. 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
  5. 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
BibTeX
@article{ma2026risk,
  title = {{Risk factors for inadequate bowel preparation and quality improvement strategies in colonoscopy: a narrative review}},
  author = {Shanshan Ma and Xinyu Zhou},
  journal = {Frontiers in Surgery},
  year = {2026},
  month = oct,
  doi = {10.3389/fsurg.2026.1969199},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2026.1969199},
  note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY  - JOUR
TI  - Risk factors for inadequate bowel preparation and quality improvement strategies in colonoscopy: a narrative review
AU  - Shanshan Ma
AU  - Xinyu Zhou
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/10/13
JO  - Frontiers in Surgery
DO  - 10.3389/fsurg.2026.1969199
UR  - https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2026.1969199
AB  - Colonoscopy is the gold-standard screening test for colorectal cancer, yet its diagnostic yield relies heavily on adequate bowel preparation. Despite standard protocols, 20%–30% of procedures still have inadequate cleansing, which lowers adenoma detection, prolongs procedures, increases repeat examinations, and wastes resources. Preparation quality is influenced by multiple interacting factors: patient characteristics (age, comorbidities, medication use, adherence), regimen features (purgative type, dose, split-dose scheduling), and healthcare delivery (education quality, appointment timing). Most previous studies have examined these factors in isolation, leaving a gap in integrated, evidence-based guidance. This narrative review synthesizes current knowledge on determinants of preparation quality, with emphasis on emerging strategies such as risk-stratified protocols, low-volume purgatives, digital health tools (mobile apps, SMS reminders), and AI-based real-time assessment. We aim to provide a practical framework for individualized preparation, thereby improving both the efficiency and quality of colonoscopy-based screening.
SN  - 2296-875X
ER  -