在短期和长期随访中重症监护后认知障碍的估计患病率:观察性研究的比例荟萃分析。

IF 5.7 1区 医学 Q1 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Mu-Hsing Ho, Yi-Wei Lee, Lizhen Wang
{"title":"在短期和长期随访中重症监护后认知障碍的估计患病率:观察性研究的比例荟萃分析。","authors":"Mu-Hsing Ho, Yi-Wei Lee, Lizhen Wang","doi":"10.1186/s13613-025-01429-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Evidence of the overall estimated prevalence of post-intensive care cognitive impairment among critically ill survivors discharged from intensive care units at short-term and long-term follow-ups is lacking. This study aimed to estimate the prevalence of the post-intensive care cognitive impairment at time to < 1 month, 1 to 3 month(s), 4 to 6 months, 7-12 months, and > 12 months discharged from intensive care units.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Electronic databases including PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, CINAHL Plus, Web of Science, and PsycINFO via ProQuest were searched from inception through July 2024. Studies that reported on cognitive impairment among patients discharged from intensive care units with valid measures were included. Data extraction and risk of bias assessment were performed independently for all included studies according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses reporting guidelines. Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to measure risk of bias. Data on cognitive impairment prevalence were pooled using a random-effects model. The primary outcome was pooled estimated proportions of prevalence of the post-intensive care cognitive impairment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 58 studies involving 347,940 patients were included. The pooled post-intensive care cognitive impairment prevalence rates at the follow-up timepoints < 1 month, 1-3 month(s), 4-6 months, 7-12 months, > 12 months were 49.8% [95% Prediction Interval (PI), 39.9%-59.7%, n = 19], 45.1% (95% PI, 34.8%-55.5%, n = 23), 47.9% (95% PI, 35.9%-60.0%, n = 16), 28.3% (95% PI, 19.9%-37.6%, n = 19), and 30.4% (95% PI, 18.4%-43.9%, n = 7), respectively. Subgroup analysis showed that significant differences of the prevalence rates between continents and study designs were observed.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The prevalence rates of post-intensive care cognitive impairment differed at different follow-up timepoints. The rates were highest within the first three months of follow-up, with a pooled prevalence of 49.8% at less than one month, 45.1% at one to three months, and 47.9% at three to six months. No significant differences in prevalence rates between studies that only included coronavirus disease 2019 survivors. These fundings highlight the need for further research to develop targeted interventions to prevent or manage cognitive impairment at short-term and long-term follow-ups.</p>","PeriodicalId":7966,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Intensive Care","volume":"15 1","pages":"3"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11723879/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Estimated prevalence of post-intensive care cognitive impairment at short-term and long-term follow-ups: a proportional meta-analysis of observational studies.\",\"authors\":\"Mu-Hsing Ho, Yi-Wei Lee, Lizhen Wang\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13613-025-01429-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Evidence of the overall estimated prevalence of post-intensive care cognitive impairment among critically ill survivors discharged from intensive care units at short-term and long-term follow-ups is lacking. This study aimed to estimate the prevalence of the post-intensive care cognitive impairment at time to < 1 month, 1 to 3 month(s), 4 to 6 months, 7-12 months, and > 12 months discharged from intensive care units.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Electronic databases including PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, CINAHL Plus, Web of Science, and PsycINFO via ProQuest were searched from inception through July 2024. Studies that reported on cognitive impairment among patients discharged from intensive care units with valid measures were included. Data extraction and risk of bias assessment were performed independently for all included studies according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses reporting guidelines. Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to measure risk of bias. Data on cognitive impairment prevalence were pooled using a random-effects model. The primary outcome was pooled estimated proportions of prevalence of the post-intensive care cognitive impairment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 58 studies involving 347,940 patients were included. The pooled post-intensive care cognitive impairment prevalence rates at the follow-up timepoints < 1 month, 1-3 month(s), 4-6 months, 7-12 months, > 12 months were 49.8% [95% Prediction Interval (PI), 39.9%-59.7%, n = 19], 45.1% (95% PI, 34.8%-55.5%, n = 23), 47.9% (95% PI, 35.9%-60.0%, n = 16), 28.3% (95% PI, 19.9%-37.6%, n = 19), and 30.4% (95% PI, 18.4%-43.9%, n = 7), respectively. Subgroup analysis showed that significant differences of the prevalence rates between continents and study designs were observed.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The prevalence rates of post-intensive care cognitive impairment differed at different follow-up timepoints. The rates were highest within the first three months of follow-up, with a pooled prevalence of 49.8% at less than one month, 45.1% at one to three months, and 47.9% at three to six months. No significant differences in prevalence rates between studies that only included coronavirus disease 2019 survivors. These fundings highlight the need for further research to develop targeted interventions to prevent or manage cognitive impairment at short-term and long-term follow-ups.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7966,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of Intensive Care\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"3\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11723879/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of Intensive Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13613-025-01429-z\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Intensive Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13613-025-01429-z","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:缺乏重症监护后认知障碍在重症监护病房出院的重症幸存者中短期和长期随访的总体估计患病率的证据。本研究旨在估计重症监护后认知障碍在重症监护病房出院12个月时的患病率。方法:通过ProQuest检索PubMed、Cochrane Library、EMBASE、CINAHL Plus、Web of Science、PsycINFO等电子数据库。研究报告了重症监护病房出院患者的认知障碍,并采取了有效措施。根据系统评价和荟萃分析报告指南的首选报告项目,对所有纳入的研究独立进行数据提取和偏倚风险评估。纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表用于测量偏倚风险。使用随机效应模型汇总有关认知障碍患病率的数据。主要结果是重症监护后认知障碍患病率的汇总估计比例。结果:共纳入58项研究,347,940例患者。随访12个月重症监护后认知障碍患病率分别为49.8%[95%预测区间(PI), 39.9% ~ 59.7%, n = 19]、45.1% (95% PI, 34.8% ~ 55.5%, n = 23)、47.9% (95% PI, 35.9% ~ 60.0%, n = 16)、28.3% (95% PI, 19.9% ~ 37.6%, n = 19)、30.4% (95% PI, 18.4% ~ 43.9%, n = 7)。亚组分析显示,各大洲和研究设计之间的患病率存在显著差异。结论:重症监护后认知障碍的患病率在不同随访时间点存在差异。在随访的前三个月内发病率最高,不到一个月的总患病率为49.8%,1至3个月的总患病率为45.1%,3至6个月的总患病率为47.9%。仅包括2019年冠状病毒病幸存者的研究之间的患病率没有显着差异。这些资金强调需要进一步研究,以制定有针对性的干预措施,在短期和长期随访中预防或管理认知障碍。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Estimated prevalence of post-intensive care cognitive impairment at short-term and long-term follow-ups: a proportional meta-analysis of observational studies.

Objective: Evidence of the overall estimated prevalence of post-intensive care cognitive impairment among critically ill survivors discharged from intensive care units at short-term and long-term follow-ups is lacking. This study aimed to estimate the prevalence of the post-intensive care cognitive impairment at time to < 1 month, 1 to 3 month(s), 4 to 6 months, 7-12 months, and > 12 months discharged from intensive care units.

Methods: Electronic databases including PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, CINAHL Plus, Web of Science, and PsycINFO via ProQuest were searched from inception through July 2024. Studies that reported on cognitive impairment among patients discharged from intensive care units with valid measures were included. Data extraction and risk of bias assessment were performed independently for all included studies according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses reporting guidelines. Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to measure risk of bias. Data on cognitive impairment prevalence were pooled using a random-effects model. The primary outcome was pooled estimated proportions of prevalence of the post-intensive care cognitive impairment.

Results: In total, 58 studies involving 347,940 patients were included. The pooled post-intensive care cognitive impairment prevalence rates at the follow-up timepoints < 1 month, 1-3 month(s), 4-6 months, 7-12 months, > 12 months were 49.8% [95% Prediction Interval (PI), 39.9%-59.7%, n = 19], 45.1% (95% PI, 34.8%-55.5%, n = 23), 47.9% (95% PI, 35.9%-60.0%, n = 16), 28.3% (95% PI, 19.9%-37.6%, n = 19), and 30.4% (95% PI, 18.4%-43.9%, n = 7), respectively. Subgroup analysis showed that significant differences of the prevalence rates between continents and study designs were observed.

Conclusions: The prevalence rates of post-intensive care cognitive impairment differed at different follow-up timepoints. The rates were highest within the first three months of follow-up, with a pooled prevalence of 49.8% at less than one month, 45.1% at one to three months, and 47.9% at three to six months. No significant differences in prevalence rates between studies that only included coronavirus disease 2019 survivors. These fundings highlight the need for further research to develop targeted interventions to prevent or manage cognitive impairment at short-term and long-term follow-ups.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Annals of Intensive Care
Annals of Intensive Care CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE-
CiteScore
14.20
自引率
3.70%
发文量
107
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: Annals of Intensive Care is an online peer-reviewed journal that publishes high-quality review articles and original research papers in the field of intensive care medicine. It targets critical care providers including attending physicians, fellows, residents, nurses, and physiotherapists, who aim to enhance their knowledge and provide optimal care for their patients. The journal's articles are included in various prestigious databases such as CAS, Current contents, DOAJ, Embase, Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition, OCLC, PubMed, PubMed Central, Science Citation Index Expanded, SCOPUS, and Summon by Serial Solutions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信