ArticleJournal of anesthesia, analgesia and critical care2025
Quality of life after ICU: 1-year follow-up in patients with and without COVID.
Article in Journal of anesthesia, analgesia and critical care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe purpose of this study was to perform a 1-year follow-up after ICU discharge and evaluate post-intensive care syndrome (PICS) in both COVID (GroupCov) and NON COVID (GroupNCov) patients.
methodsAll consecutive patients discharged from our Intensive Care Unit (ICU) from June to December 2022 were prospectively screened. Scheduled in-person visits were carried on 3, 6, and 12 months after ICU discharge to evaluate physical, cognitive, and mental health status using different scale evaluations (SF-36, Barthel Index, ISI score, PCL-5 score, MNA-sf score, Fatigue Severity Score, MoCA Test, HADS and GDS) by means of standardized questionnaires.
resultsEighty patients (50 GroupCov vs 30 GroupNCov) were initially included, but some patients did not attend all follow-up visits. At 1-year follow-up, 60 patients (30 COVID-19 and 30 non-COVID) completed all evaluations. Both groups showed PICS, but GroupCov had a better nutritional status, better outcomes in physical evaluations, and a better perception of Quality of Life (QoL) and mental health status, but a worse cognitive assessment in the MoCA Test. Moreover, heterogeneity analysis showed that GroupNCov patients had the same trend during follow-up, while in GroupCov different trends were observed over time, especially a worse nutritional state, often found in older patients, that was related to a longer hospital stay and worse psychophysical outcomes.
conclusionsThis study shows that PICS in SARS-COV2 patients is not always homogeneous, and that different clusters of psychophysical patterns may develop over time. Although our study was only observational, it seems from our preliminary results that performing a follow-up could be the basis for a secondary prevention and to develop new therapeutic strategies after patients discharge from ICU.
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.