Critical Care volume 29,
Article number: 351, Published: 08 August 2025
Background
The majority of sepsis survivors suffer from significant
long-term consequences, including cognitive, psychological, and physical
impairments. Despite growing recognition of these challenges, there is a lack
of robust evidence regarding effective post-acute interventions to improve
long-term outcomes. This systematic review aims to compile the present evidence
on the effectiveness of post-acute interventions and follow-up services on
patient-relevant long-term outcomes of sepsis survivors.
Methods
PubMed, Web of Science and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched
for relevant publications from 01/2013 until 08/2024. Studies evaluating the
effect of targeted post-acute interventions and follow-up services compared to
usual care were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the RoB2- and
ROBINS-I tool.
Results
Fourteen studies including 383,680 patients from
high-income-countries were identified. All included studies showed either a
moderate risk of bias (non-randomized studies) or some concerns (randomized
trials), primarily due to residual confounding, suboptimal blinding and outcome
assessment. Interventions varied substantially in terms of measures,
implementation time and outcomes addressed. Rehabilitation interventions were
associated with long-term survival benefits until 10 years after sepsis
according to three observational studies. Additionally, one randomized
controlled trial with minimization found that an 8-week exercise-based
intervention improved the anaerobic threshold in sepsis survivors.
Interventions (n = 7) targeting care coordination
and follow-up bundles led to reductions in rehospitalization rates and
mortality until 12 months post-discharge and were associated with improvements
in long-term physical function and PTSD symptoms. An ICU-specific virtual
reality-based intervention may reduce symptoms of PTSD and depression up to six
months after exposure.
Conclusion
Post-acute interventions, such as care coordination, bundle
approaches, and rehabilitation can improve patient-relevant outcomes in sepsis
survivors. However, the overall number of existing studies is small, all
studies may be affected by certain forms of bias and for some domains of
post-sepsis impairment no specific interventions have yet been identified.
Therefore, further high-quality prospective follow-up studies are needed to
strengthen the evidence regarding the effectiveness and acceptability of interventions
across all domains of post-sepsis impairments, particularly cognitive
impairments.
No comments:
Post a Comment