Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27306212›Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2016

Post-intensive care unit syndrome in gynecologic oncology patients.

Camille C Gunderson, Adam C Walter, Rachel Ruskin, Kai Ding, Kathleen N Moore

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 29% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Camille C GundersonDepartment of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Section of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Oklahoma, 800 NE 10th Street Suite 5040, Oklahoma City, OK, 73104, USA. camille-gunderson@ouhsc.edu.
Adam C WalterDepartment of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Section of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Oklahoma, 800 NE 10th Street Suite 5040, Oklahoma City, OK, 73104, USA.
Rachel RuskinDepartment of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Section of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Oklahoma, 800 NE 10th Street Suite 5040, Oklahoma City, OK, 73104, USA.
Kai DingDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, USA.
Kathleen N MooreDepartment of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Section of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Oklahoma, 800 NE 10th Street Suite 5040, Oklahoma City, OK, 73104, USA.
University of Oklahoma · USUniversity of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe purposes of the present study are to describe the demographic and treatment characteristics of women on the gynecologic oncology service who required intensive care and assess prevalence of risk factors for post-intensive care syndrome (PICS).

methodsA retrospective chart review was performed encompassing patients requiring admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) on the gynecology oncology service between 1/2008 and 12/2012. Descriptive statistics were computed using SAS version 9.3.

resultsOne hundred eleven patients met study criteria. Most were Caucasian (85 %), were married (50 %), and had stage III/IV disease (82 %). Risk factors for PICS were as follows: 9 % had baseline anxiety, 20 % had baseline depression, 21 % were taking an SSRI prior to admission, and 18 % took other psychiatric medications. Most ICU admissions (47 %) were for planned post-operative management. Thirty-seven percent required mechanical ventilation for a median of 1 day (range, 1-24). Twenty percent required new scheduled psychiatric medications while in the ICU, and 8.1 % of patients were discharged with a newly prescribed antidepressant. Of patients, 15.3 % had consultations with psychiatry or social work. Six percent of patients expired, and 18 % had a nontraditional discharge disposition. Overall, 60 % of the patients had at least one recognized risk factor for PICS.

conclusionsGiven the preponderance of psychiatric disorders and mechanical ventilation during post-operative ICU care in patients with gynecologic cancer, prospective evaluation of risk factors and utility of risk-reducing interventions for PICS is warranted. Long-term cognitive or physical disability is known to hasten mortality; thus, preventative strategies may increase the survival and quality of life for this patient population.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleGenital Neoplasms, FemaleHumansIntensive Care UnitsMiddle AgedQuality of LifeRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsSyndromeYoung AdultGynecologic oncologyIntensive care unitPICSPost-intensive care syndromePsychiatric

Identifiers

PMID27306212
OpenAlexW2423638691

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.