ArticleJournal of multidisciplinary healthcare2026
Application and Delphi Validation of an Omaha System-Based Evaluation Index for Post-PCI Rehabilitation Nursing.
Article in Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This study aimed to develop an evaluation index system based on the Omaha System to identify postoperative rehabilitation nursing problems in patients after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). This evaluation system aims to facilitate the timely identification of nursing problems and enhance the reliability of nursing interventions during postoperative rehabilitation. Methods: Rehabilitation nursing problems were identified through a comprehensive literature review and case analysis, considering both the physical and psychological characteristics of post-PCI patients. These problems were classified and organized according to the Omaha System. From September 2020 to February 2021, Delphi consultations were conducted with experts in China to finalize the evaluation indicators. Results: After two rounds of expert consultation, the authority coefficients of the experts were 0.858 and 0.875, and Kendall's W coefficients were 0.194 and 0.150, respectively (both Conclusion: The Omaha System-based evaluation index developed in this study offers a clinically applicable framework for identifying and managing rehabilitation nursing problems in PCI patients. Supporting comprehensive and systematic assessment provides nurses with clear guidance for problem recognition, individualized care planning, and outcome monitoring. Its application has the potential to enhance care consistency, improve patient recovery, and promote evidence-based nursing decision-making, thereby contributing to improved quality of post-PCI rehabilitation care in clinical practice.
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.