ReviewIntensive care medicine2026
Rehabilitation and the post-intensive care syndrome across the recovery continuum: a narrative review.
Review in Intensive care medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Rehabilitation and the post-intensive care syndrome across the recovery continuum: a narrative review.Intensive care medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeImproved survival from critical illness has produced a growing population of intensive care unit (ICU) survivors with new or worsened physical, cognitive, and mental-health impairment, defined as post-intensive care syndrome (PICS), and frequent distress among families/caregivers (PICS-family, PICS-F). This narrative review synthesises the evidence in adults treated in high-resource settings.
methodsRather than a formal guideline process, we used a structured descriptive approach: for each recommendation, we identified the predominant study design, assessed the consistency of findings, summarised uncertainties, and assigned an evidence-strength label (high, moderate, low, or insufficient).
resultsWe summarise the definition of PICS and its overlap with related constructs (post-sepsis morbidity, chronic critical illness, post-COVID conditions, and frailty); the mechanisms linking acute injury to persistent disability, including skeletal-muscle pathobiology, neuroinflammation, mitochondrial and neuroendocrine dysfunction, and epigenetic change; and the instruments assessing the three PICS core domains (recommending a two-step assessment approach), as well as quality of life, across the care continuum. We describe preventive and rehabilitative interventions from the ICU (e.g., the ABCDEF bundle that includes light/no sedation, delirium prevention, early mobilisation and family participation) through the ward to the post-hospital phase, the heterogeneous organisation of post-ICU recovery services, PICS-F, the educational and cultural change needed, and the health-system and policy context. PICS-F affects 20-60% of relatives; nurse-led family interventions seem promising.
conclusionThe evidence base remains limited and heterogeneous, preventing firm recommendations. Research priorities include harmonised outcome measurement, phenotyping of recovery trajectories, the optimal dose and timing of rehabilitation, and rigorous comparison of follow-up models.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42714474What 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.