Guideline on multimodal rehabilitation for patients with post-intensive care syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Intensive Care Unit (ICU) survivors often experience several impairments in their physical, cognitive, and psychological health status, which are labeled as post-intensive care syndrome (PICS). The aim of this work is to develop a multidisciplinary and -professional guideline for the rehabilitative therapy of PICS. METHODS: A multidisciplinary/-professional task force of 15 healthcare professionals applied a structured, evidence-based approach to address 10 scientific questions. For each PICO-question (Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome), best available evidence was identified. Recommendations were rated as "strong recommendation", "recommendation" or "therapy option", based on Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation principles. In addition, evidence gaps were identified. RESULTS: The evidence resulted in 12 recommendations, 4 therapy options, and one statement for the prevention or treatment of PICS. RECOMMENDATIONS: early mobilization, motor training, and nutrition/dysphagia management should be performed. Delirium prophylaxis focuses on behavioral interventions. ICU diaries can prevent/treat psychological health issues like anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorders. Early rehabilitation approaches as well as long-term access to specialized rehabilitation centers are recommended. Therapy options include additional physical rehabilitation interventions. Statement: A prerequisite for the treatment of PICS are the regular and repeated assessments of the physical, cognitive and psychological health in patients at risk for or having PICS. CONCLUSIONS: PICS is a variable and complex syndrome that requires an individual multidisciplinary, and multiprofessional approach. Rehabilitation of PICS should include an assessment and therapy of motor-, cognitive-, and psychological health impairments.

[Database indexing of health science journals from the German-speaking area: A journal analysis]. / Datenbankindexierung von gesundheitswissenschaftlichen Fachzeitschriften aus dem deutschsprachigen Raum: eine Zeitschriftenanalyse.

BACKGROUND: Journal hand searching offers the possibility to complement a literature search as part of systematic reviews and other evidence syntheses. Hand searching is indicated in cases where scientific journals with potentially relevant publications addressing the research question are not indexed in a literature database. However, it is often unclear whether these journals are actually indexed, and when they are, in which literature databases. In many cases, it is also unknown which journals should be searched by hand in addition to systematic literature search after databases to be searched have been specified. Therefore, the project aimed to investigate the indexation of selected scientific health science journals and to provide an overview of indexation in order to facilitate the hand search planning process. METHODS: Journals from German-speaking countries covering eight professional fields (medical laboratory assistance, occupational therapy, midwifery, logopedics, nursing, physiotherapy, public health and rehabilitation) were considered that publish original research papers or systematic reviews or other review types in German and/or English. Two researchers per field identified relevant journals and independently analyzed the indexing locations using the journal websites. In case of missing information, we contacted the editors. RESULTS: A total of 70 journals were included: from 1 to 17 journals per field. These journals are indexed in 1 to 29 databases. Twelve journals are not indexed or do not offer information concerning indexation. Indexation is distributed across n=74 different literature databases. Most journals are indexed in LIVIVO (n=55) and bibnet.org (n=33). Other common indexing databases are Scopus (n=18), Web of Science Core Collection (n=16), PSYNDEX (n=13), and Embase (n=10). CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate a heterogeneous indexation of the included journals. Only a small number is indexed in common international literature databases such as MEDLINE or CINAHL. On the other hand, only a few journals are not indexed in any database. The results can be used as a basis to define databases for literature searches as part of systematic reviews. In addition, the findings might guide the selection of journals for hand searching after literature databases have been defined.