ArticleJournal of multidisciplinary healthcare2025
Impact of Multidisciplinary Continuity of Care on Postoperative Outcomes in Liver Cancer Surgical Patients.
Article in Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 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.
- Development and Evaluation of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Patients Undergoing Hepatectomy.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the impact of Multidisciplinary Continuity of Care (MCC) on postoperative outcomes for liver cancer surgical patients compared to routine continuity care. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted involving 103 liver cancer patients who underwent surgical treatment between January 2021 and January 2023. Patients were assigned to groups based on the standard care protocol in effect at the time of their admission: the control group (n=50), admitted before July 2022, received conventional continuity care, while the observation group (n=53), admitted from July 2022 onward, received multidisciplinary continuity care. This temporal allocation strategy reduced selection bias by linking group assignment to hospital-wide protocol updates rather than patient-specific factors. Key outcomes assessed included physiological recovery (measured by the Chang-Hai Pain Scale and ECOG performance status), psychological status (SDS and SAS), self-management ability (ESCA), quality of life (QOL-LC), and postoperative complication rates. Results: Post-intervention outcomes significantly favored the observation group. Patients demonstrated lower Chang-Hai Pain scores (P<0.05), improved ECOG performance status (P<0.05), reduced SDS and SAS scores (P<0.05), and higher ESCA self-management scores across all dimensions (P<0.05) compared to controls. The observation group also showed superior QOL-LC scores in all domains (psychological, physical, social, and symptom management; P<0.05) and significantly lower complication rates (9.43% vs 26.00%, P<0.05). No significant between-group differences existed pre-intervention for any measure (P>0.05). Conclusion: Implementing MCC in postoperative care for liver cancer patients significantly enhances self-management ability, reduces anxiety/depression, lowers complication risk, and improves physical function and quality of life compared to routine care. MCC demonstrates high clinical value and warrants promotion.
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.