Journal of intensive care · 2025
Optimal timing for assessing post-intensive care syndrome in clinical research: a scoping review and expert survey.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Tanaka Kohei, Nakanishi Nobuto, Liu Keibun, Miyamoto Kyohei, Kawauchi Akira, Okamura Masatsugu, Katayama Sho, Iida Yuki, Kawai Yusuke, Hatakeyama Junji, Hifumi Toru, Unoki Takeshi, Kawakami Daisuke, Amaya Fumimasa, Obata Kengo, Sumita Hidenori, Morisawa Tomoyuki, Tsuboi Norihiko, Kozu Ryo, Takaki Shunsuke, Haruna Junpei, Ota Kohei, Fujinami Yoshihisa, Nosaka Nobuyuki, Shirasaki Kasumi, Inoue Shigeaki, Nishida Osamu, Nakamura Kensuke
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Since the concept of post-intensive care syndrome (PICS) was proposed, numerous studies have assessed patients and their family members. However, a wide range of assessment timings has been employed across previous studies. This study aimed to clarify how assessment timings have been implemented in existing PICS research through a scoping review, and to explore expert opinions on optimal assessment timing via an online survey.
METHODS: We conducted a scoping review of studies assessing PICS-related outcomes, including physical, cognitive, and psychological impairments, as well as PICS in family members. Studies were retrieved from MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and CINAHL, and screened by two independent pairs of reviewers. Eligible studies were published between January 2014 and December 2022. Studies lacking a clear description of assessment timing were excluded. We analyzed the reference point used to determine assessment schedules, the assessment time points, and their frequency. Additionally, an online questionnaire was administered to 23 members of the Japanese Society of Intensive Care Medicine PICS committee and working group members to collect expert opinions on these three aspects for clinical research.
RESULTS: A total of 657 studies were included. In prior studies, hospital discharge was the most commonly used reference point for determining assessment schedule (240 studies, 40%). However, ICU discharge was identified by experts as the ideal reference point (16 votes, 47%). The most frequently used assessment time points were 3 months (262, 23%), 6 months (212, 19%), and 12 months (206, 18%) post-discharge. Experts most commonly selected the period between 6 and 12 months as the optimal time point for assessment. While single assessments were most common in previous studies (337, 51%), experts considered three assessments to be ideal (12, 44%).
CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed notable discrepancies between the assessment timing reported in previous studies and the opinions of experts regarding optimal timing. Standardization of assessment timing in PICS research is warranted to enhance methodological consistency and comparability.
METHODS: We conducted a scoping review of studies assessing PICS-related outcomes, including physical, cognitive, and psychological impairments, as well as PICS in family members. Studies were retrieved from MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and CINAHL, and screened by two independent pairs of reviewers. Eligible studies were published between January 2014 and December 2022. Studies lacking a clear description of assessment timing were excluded. We analyzed the reference point used to determine assessment schedules, the assessment time points, and their frequency. Additionally, an online questionnaire was administered to 23 members of the Japanese Society of Intensive Care Medicine PICS committee and working group members to collect expert opinions on these three aspects for clinical research.
RESULTS: A total of 657 studies were included. In prior studies, hospital discharge was the most commonly used reference point for determining assessment schedule (240 studies, 40%). However, ICU discharge was identified by experts as the ideal reference point (16 votes, 47%). The most frequently used assessment time points were 3 months (262, 23%), 6 months (212, 19%), and 12 months (206, 18%) post-discharge. Experts most commonly selected the period between 6 and 12 months as the optimal time point for assessment. While single assessments were most common in previous studies (337, 51%), experts considered three assessments to be ideal (12, 44%).
CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed notable discrepancies between the assessment timing reported in previous studies and the opinions of experts regarding optimal timing. Standardization of assessment timing in PICS research is warranted to enhance methodological consistency and comparability.