Post-intensive care syndrome and health-related quality of life in long-term survivors of cardiac arrest: a prospective cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Patients discharged from intensive care are at risk for post-intensive care syndrome (PICS), which consists of physical, psychological, and/or neurological impairments. This study aimed to analyze PICS at 24 months follow-up, to identify potential risk factors for PICS, and to assess health-related quality of life in a long-term cohort of adult cardiac arrest survivors. This prospective cohort study included adult cardiac arrest survivors admitted to the intensive care unit of a Swiss tertiary academic medical center. The primary endpoint was the prevalence of PICS at 24 months follow-up, defined as impairments in physical (measured through the European Quality of Life 5-Dimensions-3-Levels instrument [EQ-5D-3L]), neurological (defined as Cerebral Performance Category Score > 2 or Modified Rankin Score > 3), and psychological (based on the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and the Impact of Event Scale-Revised) domains. Among 107 cardiac arrest survivors that completed the 2-year follow-up, 46 patients (43.0%) had symptoms of PICS, with 41 patients (38.7%) experiencing symptoms in the physical domain, 16 patients (15.4%) in the psychological domain, and 3 patients (2.8%) in the neurological domain. Key predictors for PICS in multivariate analyses were female sex (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 3.17, 95% CI 1.08 to 9.3), duration of no-flow interval during cardiac arrest (minutes) (aOR 1.17, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.33), post-discharge job-loss (aOR 31.25, 95% CI 3.63 to 268.83), need for ongoing psychological support (aOR 3.64, 95% CI 1.29 to 10.29) or psychopharmacologic treatment (aOR 9.49, 95% CI 1.9 to 47.3), and EQ-visual analogue scale (points) (aOR 0.88, 95% CI 0.84 to 0.93). More than one-third of cardiac arrest survivors experience symptoms of PICS 2 years after resuscitation, with the highest impairment observed in the physical and psychological domains. However, long-term survivors of cardiac arrest report intact health-related quality of life when compared to the general population. Future research should focus on appropriate prevention, screening, and treatment strategies for PICS in cardiac arrest patients.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".