ArticleJournal of education and health promotion2025
Feasibility, safety, and acceptability of a 4-week nurse-led comprehensive rehabilitation program for women after mastectomy: A non-randomized control trial.
Article in Journal of education and health promotion, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundComprehensive nurse-led rehabilitation programs to enhance the recovery and quality of life of women after mastectomy are well established in developed countries. Despite the increasing burden of breast cancer, access to structured post-mastectomy rehabilitation remains limited in many low-resource settings. Nurse-led programs have the potential to ensure timely intervention, enhance patient adherence, and reduce the long-term complications associated with mastectomy. This study aimed to assess the feasibility, safety, acceptability, and effectiveness of a nurse-led comprehensive rehabilitation program for women after mastectomy. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis was a non-randomized, parallel-group quasi-experimental trial (1:1 allocation ratio) conducted among ten (five each in the experimental and control groups) women who had undergone breast surgery and were recruited using a purposive sampling technique from a tertiary care hospital in India. Women in the experimental group underwent a comprehensive rehabilitation program that included supervised physical therapy, educational strategies, multimedia instructional packages, and standard care. The primary outcomes of feasibility, safety, and acceptability were assessed by the recruitment rate, missing data from questionnaires, follow-up response rates, rate of serious adverse events, dropout rate, and adherence rate. Secondary outcomes were measured in terms of muscle strength, range of motion (ROM), and health-related quality of life. Quantitative analyses including descriptive and inferential statistics were performed. The Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 26 was used for statistical analyses.
resultsThis study demonstrated the feasibility, safety, and acceptability of a nurse-led, comprehensive rehabilitation program. All approached women consented to participate (100% consent rate), and no participants dropped out. Serious adverse events were not observed. The adherence rate in the intervention group was 85%. Significant improvements were observed in the ROM (
conclusionsA nurse-led comprehensive rehabilitation program for women after mastectomy is a feasible, safe, and acceptable intervention that can enhance recovery outcomes in resource-limited settings. This study provides foundational evidence supporting the integration of nurse-led rehabilitation programs into standard post-mastectomy care. Future large-scale trials are recommended to validate these findings and optimize intervention strategies for widespread implementation.
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.