ArticleScientific reports2025
Effectiveness of a nurse-led pain management model following TACE: a retrospective analysis.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of a nurse-led pain management model in patients undergoing transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) for primary liver cancer. The model included four key components: (1) dynamic pain assessment using the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS); (2) individualized non-pharmacological comfort interventions; (3) early mobilization support; and (4) patient education and post-discharge follow-up. The objective was to determine whether this structured nursing model could improve postoperative outcomes compared to conventional care. This retrospective study included 90 patients who underwent c-TACE for primary liver cancer at our hospital. Patients were divided into two groups: the control group (n = 45, May-July 2023) received standard care, while the experimental group (n = 45, August-October 2023) received the nurse-led pain management model in addition to standard care. NRS scores were recorded at 24 and 72 h postoperatively, and comfort, satisfaction, and complication rates were assessed on the day of discharge. Baseline characteristics were comparable between the two groups. At 24 h post-TACE, NRS scores showed no significant difference between the experimental (4.58 ± 1.12) and control (4.69 ± 1.05) groups (P = 0.648). However, by 72 h, the experimental group had significantly lower NRS scores (2.58 ± 0.79 vs. 3.62 ± 0.91, P < 0.001). Comfort and satisfaction scores were significantly higher in the experimental group (P < 0.01), while the overall complication rate was lower (P < 0.05). The nurse-led structured pain management model significantly improved pain control, patient comfort, and satisfaction while reducing postoperative complications. This scalable approach may serve as an effective adjunct to conventional postoperative care following TACE.
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.