MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3011232271 · doi:10.1213/ane.0000000000004740

Post-Intensive Care Syndrome

2020· article· en· W3011232271 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Giovanni Landoni, Margherita Tozzi, Luca Cabrini, Carlo Leggieri, Alberto Zangrillo

Bibliographic record

VenueAnesthesia & Analgesia · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIntensive careIntensive care unitRehabilitationCognitionCognitive impairmentIntensive care medicinePsychiatryPhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The book Post-Intensive Care Syndrome represents a timely focused analysis of a hot topic for intensive care unit (ICU) clinicians and is part of the “Lessons from the ICU” series, published under the auspices of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. The editors are university professors and have extensive background in intensive care (Jean-Charles Preiser, Brussels; Margaret Herridge, Toronto; Elie Azoulay, Paris). The 68 authors come from all around the world, and their experience includes critical care, surgery, rehabilitation, neurosciences, and nutrition. The so-called postintensive care syndrome (PICS) includes physical, cognitive, and psychological sequelae, occurring independently of the reason for ICU admission. Up to one-third of ICU survivors may develop PICS, with significant burden and costs for patients, caregivers, and society. The post-ICU trajectory has only recently become a topic of interest for intensivists: this book, with its up-to-date chapters relating to the state-of-the-art, outlooks, and challenges in the field of PICS, provides effective background for ICU physicians. This book offers detailed evidence on PICS: physical, cognitive, and psychological impairments are exhaustively described throughout the text. The importance of rehabilitation/therapeutic programs and preventive strategies is duly highlighted, as well as the need for a well-structured follow-up and a prompt identification of patients at risk for PICS. The book is divided into 4 parts: an introduction and 3 main sections regarding physical impairment, cognitive/psychological impairment, and rehabilitation. In turn, each section is divided into numbered chapters; each chapter starts with some “learning objectives” and ends with a few “take-home messages,” which help the physician focus on key aspects. The style is clear, and the writing structure is easy to read. There is a detailed and updated bibliography at the end of each chapter. The Introduction embraces the historical perspective of PICS: at the beginning of critical care, the main, limited concern was patient’s survival to ICU discharge. It is very interesting to know that the first paper ever to include a follow-up of ICU survivors was published in the New England Journal of Medicine in 1976. This was just an exception, because we need to wait until the mid-1980s to have a more systematic follow-up of ICU survivors. The standardization of measurements for health-related quality of life, through the introduction of validated questionnaires, is another milestone that is properly emphasized. The second section focuses on physical impairment. It explores the pathophysiology of ICU-acquired weakness and critical illness neuromyopathy, caused by skeletal muscle loss and/or dysfunction of neural axis, and possible therapeutic approaches. It also describes the endocrinopathy of critical patients, the post-ICU diabetes, and the ICU-acquired immunosuppression. An interesting topic is discussed in Chapter 6, “Functional Outcomes Following Critical Illness”: the need for multidimensional outcomes (functional, neuropsychological and of mental health) and their combination with health-related quality of life is once again appropriately remarked. The third section includes the analysis of cognitive/psychological impairment. The posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is an emotional distress that occurs in people following a trauma, and critical illness and ICU admission act as a major trauma: Chapter 12 not only explores the risk factors and biological mechanisms for PTSD in ICU survivors but also suggests strategies for the prevention of the distress such as the use of ICU diaries. Another crucial topic is addressed in Chapter 16, “Behavioral Therapies”: patients can be taught coping skills to “manage and reduce symptoms on their own.” At the end of this section, the authors explore the impact of PICS on relatives of critically ill patients: anxiety, depression, and PTSD can be common in families and caregivers. The fourth section focuses on rehabilitation: first, it shows modalities for physical rehabilitation; then, it emphasizes the importance of a well-balanced nutritional support to enhance the synthesis of muscle proteins after the breakdown due to the critical illness and to prevent gut diseases which facilitate bacterial translocation. Chapters 22 and 23 highlight the importance of follow-up consultations after ICU discharge: this continuity of care is highly valued by patients and relatives, and it is an important opportunity to discuss their concerns, provide feedback of their experiences, and orientate the subsequent treatments. To sum up, Post-Intensive Care Syndrome is complete and clear, and it can be recommended for both trainees and board-certified specialists. This book is a true “eye-opener,” raising the awareness about the importance of improving long-term functional, psychological, and cognitive outcomes of critical patients, and providing new insights on how our interventions during and after ICU stay may impact the quality of life of survivors and their families. Giovanni Landoni, MDDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive CareIRCCS San Raffaele Scientific InstituteMilan, ItalyVita-Salute San Raffaele UniversityMilan, Italy[email protected]Margherita Tozzi, MDDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive CareIRCCS San Raffaele Scientific InstituteMilan, ItalyLuca Cabrini, MDDipartimento di Biotecnologie e Scienze della VitaUniversità degli Studi dell’InsubriaAzienda Ospedaliera Ospedale di Circolo e Fondazione Macchi di VareseAzienda Socio-Sanitaria Territoriale dei Sette LaghiVarese, ItalyCarlo Leggieri, MDDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive CareIRCCS San Raffaele Scientific InstituteMilan, ItalyAlberto Zangrillo, MDDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive CareIRCCS San Raffaele Scientific InstituteMilan, ItalyVita-Salute San Raffaele UniversityMilan, Italy

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.272
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.236 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnesthesia & AnalgesiaSame topicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive DisordersFrench-language works237,207