Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42093431›Full record

Observational studyActa anaesthesiologica Scandinavica2026

Cognitive Functioning After Circulatory Shock: A Prospective Observational Study.

Salla Laurila, Eva Nordenswan, Henriikka Ollila, Riikka Pihlaja, Erika Wilkman, Elina Varis, Maria Heliste, Sanna Koskinen, Annamari Tuulio-Henriksson, Marjaana Tiainen and 4 more

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

14 authors.

Salla LaurilaDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Tampere University Hospital, Wellbeing Services County of Pirkanmaa, and Tampere University, Tampere, Finland.ORCID 0009-0002-9097-6017
Eva NordenswanDepartment of Psychology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Henriikka OllilaDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Riikka PihlajaDepartment of Psychology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Erika WilkmanDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.ORCID 0000-0003-4250-7523
Elina VarisDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Maria HelisteDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Sanna KoskinenDepartment of Psychology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Annamari Tuulio-HenrikssonDepartment of Psychology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Marjaana TiainenDepartment of Neurology, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.ORCID 0000-0001-5107-1990
Heini HuhtalaFaculty of Social Sciences, Tampere University, Tampere, Finland.ORCID 0000-0003-1372-430X
Anne H KuitunenDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Tampere University Hospital, Wellbeing Services County of Pirkanmaa, and Tampere University, Tampere, Finland.ORCID 0000-0002-8121-9607
Laura HokkanenDepartment of Psychology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Johanna HästbackaDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Tampere University Hospital, Wellbeing Services County of Pirkanmaa, and Tampere University, Tampere, Finland.

Funding

HUS TYH2020341HUS TYH2021129Medicinska Understödsföreningen Liv & HälsaMedtronicPaulo FoundationStiftelsen Dorothea Olivia, Karl Walter och Jarl Walter Perkléns MinneUniversity level research T62724
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCognitive impairment in intensive care unit (ICU) survivors is multifactorial and can affect especially memory, attention, and executive functions. This study aimed to determine the cognitive functioning of patients with circulatory shock immediately after ICU discharge and 3 months later.

methodsThis study, ASSESS-SHOCK 2, is a preplanned sub-study of the observational ASSESS-SHOCK study conducted at Helsinki University Hospital ICU. We included adults with circulatory shock, defined as hypotension requiring vasopressor infusion and concomitant signs of hypoperfusion. We excluded patients with severe neurological or psychiatric diagnoses, impairment of hearing or vision, developmental disability, and language barriers. Cognitive functioning of patients was assessed within 3 days of ICU discharge and 3 months thereafter with the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) test. We defined cognitive impairment as MoCA score < 26 points. We also included data of 48 volunteer controls, tested once, to analyses.

resultsFifty-five patients underwent an assessment within 3 days of ICU discharge, and 36 of them completed a follow-up assessment at 3 months. At discharge median MoCA-score was 22 (IQR 17-25). At the 3 months follow-up, the median MoCA-score was 26.5 points (IQR 24.25-28) showing improvement from discharge to follow-up (p < 0.001). The prevalence of cognitive impairment at discharge was 78.2%, and, at the 3-month follow-up 44.4%. In the control group, the median MoCA score was 27 points (IQR 25-28) and the prevalence of cognitive impairment 33%.

conclusionWe found cognitive impairment in more than three out of four ICU survivors immediately after ICU treatment for circulatory shock. We observed an improvement in cognitive functioning between ICU discharge and 3 months follow-up. These results have importance considering the optimal timing of information given to patients and when involving patients in decision-making. EDITORIAL COMMENT: This study used the MoCA score to investigate the change in cognitive impairment in patients who survived circulatory shock, from the time of discharge from intensive care to 3 months after discharge. Scores indicated more severe cognitive dysfunction compared to controls at the time of discharge, but these improved to match control scores 3 months later. The findings have important implications for strategies to inform and support newly discharged ICU survivors who have experienced circulatory shock.

Indexed as

CognitionCognitive DysfunctionShockAgedFemaleHumansIntensive Care UnitsMaleMiddle AgedProspective Studiescognitive impairmentdecision makingintensive care unitMontreal Cognitive Assessmentrecoveryshock

Identifiers

PMID42093431
PMCPMC13150470

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.