Prevalence of Post-intensive care syndrome among intensive care unit-survivors and its association with intensive care unit length of stay: Systematic review and meta-analysis
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Post-intensive Care Syndrome (PICS) is defined as various physical, psychological, and cognitive, impairments that can arise during an ICU stay, continue after leaving the ICU, or even persist following hospital discharge. It impacts both patients and their family's quality of life. Various primary studies worldwide have reported prevalence of PICS among ICU survivors. However, these studies exhibit inconsistency and wide variations. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to estimate the pooled prevalence of post intensive care syndrome among intensive care unit survivors along with its association with ICU length of stay. METHODS: We used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 checklist for this review. We searched PubMed/Medline, CINHAL, Embase, and Google scholar to retrieve articles. The Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used for quality assessment of articles. The random effects model with I-squared test was used to estimate the prevalence of PICS and its association with ICU length of stay. To identify the source of heterogeneity within the included studies, meta-regression and subgroup analysis were used. We employed Egger's regression test and funnel plots for assessing publication bias. STATA version 17.0 software was used for all statistical analyses. A p-value of < 0.05 with 95% confidence interval was used declare statistically significant. RESULTS: A total of 19 articles with a population of 10179 ICU-survivors were included in this review. The pooled prevalence of PICS was found to be 54.35% (95% CI = 45.54, 63.15). In sub-group analysis by region, the highest prevalence was observed in studies done in south and north America with overall prevalence of 61.95% (95% CI = 28.33, 95.62). Among the three domains of PICS (physical, cognitive and mental domains), the highest prevalence score was observed in the physical domain with overall prevalence of 45.99% (95% CI = 34.66, 57.31). In this meta-analysis, those patients who stayed more than four days in the ICU were 1.207 [95% CI = 1.119, 1.295] times more likely to develop at least one among the three domains of PICS in the post-intensive care period than their counterparts. CONCLUSION: This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrate a high prevalence of PICS among ICU survivors, and highlight the significant association between ICU length of stay and the development of PICS. These findings underscore the need for targeted interventions to mitigate the long-term effects of critical illness, particularly for patients with prolonged ICU stays.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,072 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,018 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».