SynthesisFrontiers in neurology
Delirium-directed interventions and long-term cognitive outcomes in critically ill adults: a systematic review of randomized clinical trials.
Synthesis in Frontiers in neurology. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Delirium is a common manifestation of acute brain dysfunction during critical illness, strongly associated with persistent cognitive impairment among ICU survivors. Although delirium duration and severity have been linked to adverse neurocognitive outcomes, it remains uncertain whether delirium-directed interventions implemented during ICU admission or after discharge can meaningfully modify cognitive trajectories. We conducted a systematic review of randomized clinical trials to evaluate whether delirium-directed interventions improve long-term cognitive outcomes in adult ICU survivors. Methods: This PRISMA-compliant systematic review was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD420261295266). We included randomized clinical trials enrolling adults admitted to medical or surgical ICUs with acute respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation and/or shock. Eligible studies evaluated delirium-directed pharmacological or non-pharmacological interventions and reported validated cognitive outcomes assessed at least 3 months after discharge. Risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool. Due to substantial heterogeneity, findings were synthesized narratively rather than quantitatively. Results: Four randomized clinical trials met all inclusion criteria; one additional trial (Schweickert et al., 2009) was reviewed as contextual evidence given absence of post-discharge neuropsychological outcomes. Two trials derived from the same parent cohort (MIND-USA 2018 and its 2024 long-term follow-up), yielding three effective independent randomized comparisons. Two trials evaluated pharmacological treatment of established ICU delirium using antipsychotic agents. Two trials evaluated non-pharmacological rehabilitation-based interventions with validated post-discharge cognitive outcomes. Rehabilitation-based interventions were feasible and associated with signals of improved executive function. Antipsychotic treatment did not improve global cognition, functional status, or quality of life at 3 or 12 months. Conclusion: Rehabilitation-based delirium-directed interventions demonstrate biological plausibility and preliminary signals of benefit for long-term cognitive outcomes after critical illness, whereas antipsychotic treatment of established ICU delirium does not confer sustained cognitive benefit. The evidence base comprises three distinct randomized comparisons, underscoring the need for larger, cognition-powered trials with harmonized survivorship endpoints. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420261295266, CRD420261295266.
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.