Trial reportNursing in critical care2026
Acceptability and Fidelity of a Cognitive Rehabilitation Intervention During and After Intensive Care: A Feasibility Evaluation.
Trial report in Nursing in critical care, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCognitive impairment is common after critical illness, yet structured cognitive rehabilitation is rarely integrated into routine intensive care practice. ICU CogHab is a stakeholder- and theory-informed intervention comprising two components: Mindfulness and Brain Training, developed to support recovery from intensive care to 6-month follow-up.
aimTo evaluate the feasibility of the ICU CogHab intervention, focussing on acceptability and fidelity among ICU patients and nurses. STUDY
designA multi-method feasibility evaluation was conducted alongside a pragmatic, five-arm randomised controlled feasibility trial in four Danish ICUs. Data were collected using patient and nurse surveys and semi-structured interviews. Acceptability was explored in terms of three domains: affective attitude, burden and perceived effectiveness. Fidelity was assessed in relation to adherence and dose, with participant responsiveness and quality of delivery examined within adherence. Quantitative data were analysed descriptively, and qualitative data were analysed using deductive content analysis.
resultsThirty-one patients contributed with survey data and nine participated in interviews. In addition, 53 nurses contributed with 194 session-based surveys and seven interviews, informing evaluation of delivery during ICU admission. Both components were generally perceived as relevant and appropriate by patients and nurses. Patients described the components as meaningful and supportive. Fidelity varied across settings and over time, with adherence and dose influenced by clinical condition, fatigue, patient readiness and competing rehabilitation demands, meaning that intervention use often required adaptation in timing and duration across recovery phases. Nurses reported contextual barriers to delivery, including high workload and competing clinical priorities.
conclusionThe ICU CogHab intervention components demonstrated overall acceptability across ICU and post-discharge phases. Variation in fidelity reflected the patient condition, clinical context and competing demands, providing direction for further refinement before larger-scale evaluation. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Cognitive rehabilitation may be acceptable and feasible to introduce within intensive care pathways but delivery may require flexible timing, integration into routine care and support across the ICU-to-home transition.
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.