Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Evidence for scalable interventions for post-intensive care syndrome (PICS) remains uncertain. This descriptive pilot randomized feasibility trial evaluated remote health coaching, home-based rehabilitation, and monitoring. Adult intensive care unit survivors with a Healthy Aging Brain Care Monitor-Self Report score of 12 or higher, 2–4 weeks after hospital discharge, were randomized 1:1 to a 12-week intervention or usual care. Feasibility outcomes included recruitment, retention, outcome completeness, intervention delivery, and safety; no success thresholds were prespecified. Clinical outcomes were exploratory. Analyses used outcome-specific complete cases by randomized group without imputation or multiplicity adjustment. Of 1039 patients contacted, 248 completed screening, 169 met the eligibility threshold, 65 consented, and 56 (5.4%) were randomized. Study completion was 20/28 (71.4%) with intervention and 22/28 (78.6%) with usual care. Core patient-reported outcomes were available for 42/56 (75.0%) and paired activity data for 25/56 (44.6%). Coaching completion was 218/336 protocol-specified sessions (64.9%) and 218/284 sessions scheduled while participants remained active (76.8%). No deaths, hospital or intensive care unit readmissions, urgent psychiatric referrals, or study-related injuries were recorded. Exploratory between-group differences in change were 0.10 for EQ-5D-5 L index (95% confidence interval [CI], -0.01 to 0.21) and − 2.08 for depressive symptoms (95% CI, -3.98 to -0.17). Remote rehabilitation was deliverable but requires refinement. Clinical findings are hypothesis-generating and do not establish efficacy. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06184308; first posted 28 December 2023.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cartin‐Ceba et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: