SynthesisPloS one2018
Rehabilitation for patients with sepsis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Guideline on multimodal rehabilitation for patients with post-intensive care syndrome.Critical care (London, England) · 2023Guideline
- Effect of Sitting Baduanjin exercise on early rehabilitation of sepsis patients with non-invasive ventilation : a randomized controlled trial.BMC complementary medicine and therapies · 2024Trial
- Cognitive Health and Quality of Life After Surviving Sepsis: A Narrative Review.Journal of intensive care medicine · 2026Review
- Renal dysfunction as a marker of adverse outcomes in early sepsis in the emergency department.Clinical and experimental emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Rehabilitation needs, preferences, barriers, and facilitators of individuals with sepsis: a qualitative study.International journal of nursing studies advances · 2025Article
- A Qualitative Study Exploring the Rehabilitation Experience of Individuals with a Previous Diagnosis of Cancer and/or Sepsis, Their Caregivers, and Health Providers.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Health-Related Quality of Life Among Patients Who Have Survived an Episode of Sepsis in the United States: A Systematic Review.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2025Review
- Sepsis and post-sepsis syndrome: a multisystem challenge requiring comprehensive care and management-a review.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- Return to work after hospitalization for sepsis: a nationwide, registry-based cohort study.Critical care (London, England) · 2023Article
- Healthcare Utilization and Costs in Sepsis Survivors in Germany-Secondary Analysis of a Prospective Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Pathophysiology and Treatment Strategies of Acute Myopathy and Muscle Wasting after Sepsis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Review
- ICU rehabilitation is associated with reduced long-term mortality from sepsis in patients with low skeletal muscle mass: a case control study.Annals of translational medicine · 2019Article
- Analysis of the prevalence and risk factors of post-intensive-care syndrome and post-sepsis syndrome in survivors of sepsis.Science progressArticle
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of this systematic review was to determine whether rehabilitation impacts clinically relevant outcomes among adult patients with sepsis. Randomized controlled trials from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PEDro, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Platform Search Portal, as well as conference proceedings and reference lists of relevant articles were collected. Two reviewers independently identified randomized controlled trials on the rehabilitation of patients with sepsis, and the two reviewers independently abstracted trial level data including population characteristics, interventions, comparisons, and clinical outcomes. Our primary outcomes were quality of life (QOL), activity of daily living (ADL), and mortality. Our secondary outcomes were length of stay, return to work, muscle strength, delirium, and all adverse events. The quality of evidence was determined using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. We included two trials enrolling 75 patients. The mean difference (95% confidence interval [CI]) of physical function and physical role in QOL measured by SF-36 were 21.10 (95% CI: 6.57-35.63) and 44.40 (95% CI: 22.55-66.05), respectively. Rehabilitation did not significantly decrease intensive care unit (ICU) mortality (risk ratio, 2.02 [95% CI: 0.46-8.91], I2 = 0%; n = 75). ICU length of stay and hospital length of stay and muscle strength were not statistically significantly different and no adverse events were reported in both studies. The certainty of the evidence for these outcomes was "very low." Data on ADL, return to work, and delirium were not available in any of the trials. Rehabilitation of patients with sepsis might not decrease ICU mortality, but might improve QOL. Further, well-designed trials measuring important outcomes will be needed to determine the benefit and harm of rehabilitation among patients with sepsis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.