ArticleJournal of pain research2025
A Cross-Sectional Study on Current Perioperative Pain Management and Nurses' Pain Management Self-Efficacy in China's Interventional Department.
Article in Journal of pain research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of an algorithm-based postoperative pain management in patients undergoing abdominal surgery-A prospective interventional study.Journal of education and health promotion · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To critically evaluate the present status of perioperative pain management among nurses in interventional departments as well as to delineate the factors influencing the self-efficacy of pain management to provide a foundation for enhancing perioperative pain management practices. Methods: This was a descriptive cross-sectional study on 941 nurses from 24 Chinese provinces and municipalities. A questionnaire was conducted to examine the current pain management practices. Independent sample Results: About 76.5% of the nurses in the interventional departments had undergone pain management training; however, more than one-third (37.6%) had not in the past two years. Merely 4.9% of nurses expressed confidence that their knowledge in pain management was sufficient to meet the demands the clinical practice. The foremost three areas of pain management information desired by the nurses in the intervention department were pain psychology (79.6%), pharmacological pain treatment (78.1%), and non-pharmacological pain interventions (77.4%). A majority (57.6%) of the nurses failed to assess the patients' comprehension and perspectives of analgesia, elements contributing to pain exacerbation or alleviation, and the outcomes of analgesic measures. The cumulative score for the pain self-efficacy questionnaire among nurses in the intervention department was 63.95±21.83. Multiple linear regression analysis revealed that variables such as the acquisition of pain knowledge, the frequency of pain training in the past two years, the ratio of evaluation tools employed for assessment, the prevalent utilization of multi-dimensional evaluation instruments, and professional course studies in academia were determinants influencing pain management self-efficacy. Conclusion: Perioperative pain management by interventional department nurses in China is unstandardized and lacks continuous education. Nursing administrators should create targeted training to boost pain assessment, prevention and treatment abilities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.