Scoping Review: Neurocognitive Outcome Assessments After Critical Illness in Children

Abstract

Objectives To map the literature regarding assessment of neurocognitive outcomes in PICU survivors. Secondary objectives were to identify literature gaps and to provide data for development of a Core Outcome Measures Set in the domain. Methods Planned, a priori analysis was performed of data from an over-all scoping review of Post-Intensive Care Syndrome-pediatrics (PICS-p) functional outcomes. English-language databases and registries from 1970 to 2017 were searched by a medical librarian to identify manuscripts reporting on Post Intensive Care Syndrome-pediatrics (PICS-p). Further, detailed data extraction for neurocognitive outcomes was performed focusing on study characteristics, instruments used, and populations. Results 114 instruments evaluated neurocognitive function in 183 manuscripts. 83% of manuscripts were published after 2000. Median of 3 (IQR 2-5) neurocognitive instruments per manuscript were reported. Wechsler Scales (45%), clinical neurologic evaluations (21%), Pediatric Cerebral Performance Category (20%), Bayley Scales of Infant Development (16%), and Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales (11%) were the most commonly used instruments. Median sample size was 65 (IQR 32-129) subjects. Most (63%) assessments were conducted in-person and parents/guardians (40%) provided the information. Patients with congenital heart disease and traumatic brain injury were most commonly evaluated (31% and 24% of manuscripts, respectively). Adolescents were the most commonly studied age group (34%). Baseline function was infrequently assessed (11% of manuscripts); most studies assessed patients at only one time point after PICU discharge. Within studies, neurocognitive assessments were often combined with others – especially social (18%) and physical (8%). Conclusions 183 manuscripts studied the neurocognitive domain of PICS-p. Studies were quantitative and tended to focus on populations with anticipated cognitive impairment. Considerable variability exists among the chosen 114 instruments used; however, 4 instruments were frequently chosen with focus on intelligence, cerebral functioning, and developmental and adaptive behavior. The literature is marked by lack of agreement on methodologies but reflects the burgeoning interest in studying PICS-p neurocognitive outcomes.