Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2025 Jan 10;15(1):3.
doi: 10.1186/s13613-025-01429-z.

Estimated prevalence of post-intensive care cognitive impairment at short-term and long-term follow-ups: a proportional meta-analysis of observational studies

Mu-Hsing Ho  1 , Yi-Wei Lee  2 , Lizhen Wang  3
Affiliations
Review

Estimated prevalence of post-intensive care cognitive impairment at short-term and long-term follow-ups: a proportional meta-analysis of observational studies

Mu-Hsing Ho et al. Ann Intensive Care. .

Abstract

Objective: Evidence of the overall estimated prevalence of post-intensive care cognitive impairment among critically ill survivors discharged from intensive care units at short-term and long-term follow-ups is lacking. This study aimed to estimate the prevalence of the post-intensive care cognitive impairment at time to < 1 month, 1 to 3 month(s), 4 to 6 months, 7-12 months, and > 12 months discharged from intensive care units.

Methods: Electronic databases including PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, CINAHL Plus, Web of Science, and PsycINFO via ProQuest were searched from inception through July 2024. Studies that reported on cognitive impairment among patients discharged from intensive care units with valid measures were included. Data extraction and risk of bias assessment were performed independently for all included studies according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses reporting guidelines. Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to measure risk of bias. Data on cognitive impairment prevalence were pooled using a random-effects model. The primary outcome was pooled estimated proportions of prevalence of the post-intensive care cognitive impairment.

Results: In total, 58 studies involving 347,940 patients were included. The pooled post-intensive care cognitive impairment prevalence rates at the follow-up timepoints < 1 month, 1-3 month(s), 4-6 months, 7-12 months, > 12 months were 49.8% [95% Prediction Interval (PI), 39.9%-59.7%, n = 19], 45.1% (95% PI, 34.8%-55.5%, n = 23), 47.9% (95% PI, 35.9%-60.0%, n = 16), 28.3% (95% PI, 19.9%-37.6%, n = 19), and 30.4% (95% PI, 18.4%-43.9%, n = 7), respectively. Subgroup analysis showed that significant differences of the prevalence rates between continents and study designs were observed.

Conclusions: The prevalence rates of post-intensive care cognitive impairment differed at different follow-up timepoints. The rates were highest within the first three months of follow-up, with a pooled prevalence of 49.8% at less than one month, 45.1% at one to three months, and 47.9% at three to six months. No significant differences in prevalence rates between studies that only included coronavirus disease 2019 survivors. These fundings highlight the need for further research to develop targeted interventions to prevent or manage cognitive impairment at short-term and long-term follow-ups.

Keywords: Cognitive impairment; Critically ill survivors; Post-intensive care syndrome; Proportional meta-analysis; Systematic review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declarations. Ethics approval and consent to participate: Not applicable as this is a systematic review and meta-analysis. Consent for publication: Not applicable. Competing interests: Dr Mu-Hsing Ho reported receiving grant funding from the Health and Medical Research Fund (HMRF), Health Bureau, Hong Kong SAR and HMRF Research Fellowship Scheme, Health Bureau, Hong Kong SAR during the conduct of the study. No other disclosures were reported.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
PRISMA 2020 flow diagram
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Pooled proportions of post-intensive care cognitive impairment at follow-up within a month
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Pooled proportions of post-intensive care cognitive impairment at 1 to 3 month(s) follow-up
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Pooled proportions of post-intensive care cognitive impairment at 7 to 12 months follow-up
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Pooled prevalence rates of post-intensive care cognitive impairment in different continents (A) and Study Designs (B) Subgroups Across all Follow-up Timepoints
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Akinosoglou K, Schinas G, Almyroudi MP, Gogos C, Dimopoulos G. The impact of age on intensive care. Ageing Res Rev. 2023;84: 101832. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Jackson JC, Ely EW. Cognitive impairment after critical illness: etiologies, risk factors, and future directions. Semin Respir Crit Care Med. 2013;34(2):216–22. - PubMed
    1. Hiser SL, Fatima A, Ali M, Needham DM. Post-intensive care syndrome (PICS): recent updates. J Intensive Care. 2023;11(1):23. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Peach BC, Valenti M, Sole ML. A call for the World Health organization to create international classification of disease diagnostic codes for post-intensive care syndrome in the age of COVID-19. World Med Health Policy. 2021;13(2):373–82. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Needham DM, Davidson J, Cohen H, Hopkins RO, Weinert C, Wunsch H, Zawistowski C, Bemis-Dougherty A, Berney SC, Bienvenu OJ, et al. Improving long-term outcomes after discharge from intensive care unit: report from a stakeholders’ conference. Crit Care Med. 2012;40(2):502–9. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources