Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40338918›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2025

Prevalence of Post-intensive care syndrome among intensive care unit-survivors and its association with intensive care unit length of stay: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Temesgen Ayenew, Menberu Gete, Mihretie Gedfew, Addisu Getie, Abebe Dilie Afenigus, Afework Edmealem, Haile Amha, Girma Alem, Bekele Getenet Tiruneh, Mengistu Abebe Messelu

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing 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

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

  1. [Frailty in intensive care medicine].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Temesgen AyenewDepartment of Nursing, Debre Markos University, College of Health Sciences.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5411-6947
Menberu GeteDepartment of Nursing, Debre Markos University, College of Health Sciences.
Mihretie GedfewDepartment of Nursing, Debre Markos University, College of Health Sciences.
Addisu GetieDepartment of Nursing, Debre Markos University, College of Health Sciences.
Abebe Dilie AfenigusDepartment of Nursing, Debre Markos University, College of Health Sciences.
Afework EdmealemDepartment of Nursing, Debre Markos University, College of Health Sciences.
Haile AmhaDepartment of Nursing, Debre Markos University, College of Health Sciences.
Girma AlemDepartment of Nursing, Debre Markos University, College of Health Sciences.
Bekele Getenet TirunehDepartment of Internal Medicine, Debre Markos University, School of Medicine.
Mengistu Abebe MesseluDepartment of Nursing, Debre Markos University, College of Health Sciences.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPost-intensive Care Syndrome (PICS) is defined as various physical, psychological, and cognitive, impairments that can arise during an ICU stay, continue after leaving the ICU, or even persist following hospital discharge. It impacts both patients and their family's quality of life. Various primary studies worldwide have reported prevalence of PICS among ICU survivors. However, these studies exhibit inconsistency and wide variations. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to estimate the pooled prevalence of post intensive care syndrome among intensive care unit survivors along with its association with ICU length of stay.

methodsWe used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 checklist for this review. We searched PubMed/Medline, CINHAL, Embase, and Google scholar to retrieve articles. The Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used for quality assessment of articles. The random effects model with I-squared test was used to estimate the prevalence of PICS and its association with ICU length of stay. To identify the source of heterogeneity within the included studies, meta-regression and subgroup analysis were used. We employed Egger's regression test and funnel plots for assessing publication bias. STATA version 17.0 software was used for all statistical analyses. A p-value of < 0.05 with 95% confidence interval was used declare statistically significant.

resultsA total of 19 articles with a population of 10179 ICU-survivors were included in this review. The pooled prevalence of PICS was found to be 54.35% (95% CI = 45.54, 63.15). In sub-group analysis by region, the highest prevalence was observed in studies done in south and north America with overall prevalence of 61.95% (95% CI = 28.33, 95.62). Among the three domains of PICS (physical, cognitive and mental domains), the highest prevalence score was observed in the physical domain with overall prevalence of 45.99% (95% CI = 34.66, 57.31). In this meta-analysis, those patients who stayed more than four days in the ICU were 1.207 [95% CI = 1.119, 1.295] times more likely to develop at least one among the three domains of PICS in the post-intensive care period than their counterparts.

conclusionThis systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrate a high prevalence of PICS among ICU survivors, and highlight the significant association between ICU length of stay and the development of PICS. These findings underscore the need for targeted interventions to mitigate the long-term effects of critical illness, particularly for patients with prolonged ICU stays.

Indexed as

Critical CareIntensive Care UnitsLength of StaySurvivorsCritical IllnessHumansPrevalenceQuality of Life

Identifiers

PMID40338918
PMCPMC12061161

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.