Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38498470›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Recovery following discharge from intensive care: What do patients think is helpful and what services are missing?

Brenda O'Neill, Natasha Green, Bronagh Blackwood, Danny McAuley, Fidelma Moran, Niamh MacCormac, Paul Johnston, James J McNamee, Claire Shevlin, Judy Bradley

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
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

10 authors.

Brenda O'NeillCentre for Health and Rehabilitation Technologies, INHR, Ulster University, Belfast, United Kingdom.
Natasha GreenSchool of Medicine, Dentistry and Biomedical Sciences, Wellcome-Wolfson Institute of Experimental Medicine, Belfast, United Kingdom.
Bronagh BlackwoodSchool of Medicine, Dentistry and Biomedical Sciences, Wellcome-Wolfson Institute of Experimental Medicine, Belfast, United Kingdom.
Danny McAuleySchool of Medicine, Dentistry and Biomedical Sciences, Wellcome-Wolfson Institute of Experimental Medicine, Belfast, United Kingdom.
Fidelma MoranCentre for Health and Rehabilitation Technologies, INHR, Ulster University, Belfast, United Kingdom.
Niamh MacCormacCentre for Health and Rehabilitation Technologies, INHR, Ulster University, Belfast, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-6748-5610
Paul JohnstonAntrim Hospital, NHSCT, Antrim, United Kingdom.
James J McNameeRoyal Victoria Hospital, BHSCT, Belfast, United Kingdom.
Claire ShevlinCraigavon Area Hospital, SHSCT, Craigavon, United Kingdom.
Judy BradleySchool of Medicine, Dentistry and Biomedical Sciences, Wellcome-Wolfson Institute of Experimental Medicine, Belfast, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRecovery following critical illness is complex due to the many challenges patients face which influence their long-term outcomes. We explored patients' views about facilitators of recovery after critical illness which could be used to inform the components and timing of specific rehabilitation interventions.

aimsTo explore the views of patients after discharge from an intensive care unit (ICU) about their recovery and factors that facilitated recovery, and to determine additional services that patients felt were missing during their recovery.

methodsQualitative study involving individual face-to-face semi-structured interviews at six months (n = 11) and twelve months (n = 10). Written, informed consent was obtained. [Ethics approval 17/NI/0115]. Interviews were audiotaped, transcribed and analysed using template analysis.

findingsTemplate analysis revealed four core themes: (1) Physical activity and function; (2) Recovery of cognitive and emotional function; (3) Facilitators to recovery; and (4) Gaps in healthcare services.

conclusionPatient reported facilitators to recovery include support and guidance from others and self-motivation and goal setting, equipment for mobility and use of technology. Barriers include a lack of follow up services, exercise rehabilitation, peer support and personal feedback. Patients perceived that access to specific healthcare services was fragmented and where services were unavailable this contributed to slower or poorer quality of recovery. ICU patient recover could be facilitated by a comprehensive rehabilitation intervention that includes patient-directed strategies and health care services.

Indexed as

Critical IllnessPatient DischargeCritical CareHumansIntensive Care Units

Identifiers

PMID38498470
PMCPMC10947670

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.