Prevalence and characteristics of intensive care unit follow-up services in Australia and New Zealand: A binational survey

BACKGROUND: Survivors of an intensive care unit (ICU) admission frequently experience long-term physical, cognitive, and psychological challenges. ICU follow-up services may be an important mechanism to address post-ICU morbidity, but services in Australia and New Zealand are poorly defined. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence and characteristics of ICU follow-up services in Australia and New Zealand. METHODS: A cross-sectional online survey, open from February to August 2025, was distributed via email to ICU medical directors across 227 public and private ICUs in Australia and New Zealand, with follow-up phone calls at 3 months. The survey comprised questions on timing, frequency, methods of delivery, professionals involved, outcome measures utilised, and barriers and enablers to ICU follow-up service provision. Questions were predominantly close ended with predefined response options, with some allowing additional free-text responses. Data were number (%). Free-text responses were analysed descriptively and grouped into existing or newly generated categories where appropriate. RESULTS: Of a possible 227 ICUs, 83 participated (37% response rate). Although 67 sites (81%) acknowledged the importance of follow-up services, only 24 (29%) offered such a service for patients and 21 (25%) for caregivers. Referral timing varied from during hospital admission to 6 months post discharge. Follow-up was predominantly nurse led (n = 13, 48%) and mostly delivered face-to-face (n = 13, 48%). Only seven (27%) of ICUs collected patient-related outcome data, with a wide variety of tools used. The primary barriers to providing follow-up were funding (n = 62, 75%) and limited ICU clinicians to staff a follow-up service (n = 53, 64%). CONCLUSIONS: Approximately a third of participating ICUs in Australia and New Zealand had a follow-up service, limited by financial and ICU clinician staffing constraints. Where follow-up was provided, service characteristics varied greatly. Further data to identify effective models of ICU follow-up care will improve the consistency, equitability, and impact of post-ICU support.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Australian Critical Care
Published
2026-05-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aucc.2026.101613
Primary Topic
Sepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Prevalence and characteristics of intensive care unit follow-up services in Australia and New Zealand: A binational survey

Aniket Nadkarni, Elizabeth Viner Smith, Simone Dafoe, Kimberley Haines et al.
Australian Critical Care
Sepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
article

Prevalence and characteristics of intensive care unit follow-up services in Australia and New Zealand: A binational survey

Aniket Nadkarni, Elizabeth Viner Smith, Simone Dafoe, Kimberley Haines, Lee-anne Chapple, Daryl Jones, Glenn Eastwood, Carol L. Hodgson
article en

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Survivors of an intensive care unit (ICU) admission frequently experience long-term physical, cognitive, and psychological challenges. ICU follow-up services may be an important mechanism to address post-ICU morbidity, but services in Australia and New Zealand are poorly defined. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence and characteristics of ICU follow-up services in Australia and New Zealand. METHODS: A cross-sectional online survey, open from February to August 2025, was distributed via email to ICU medical directors across 227 public and private ICUs in Australia and New Zealand, with follow-up phone calls at 3 months. The survey comprised questions on timing, frequency, methods of delivery, professionals involved, outcome measures utilised, and barriers and enablers to ICU follow-up service provision. Questions were predominantly close ended with predefined response options, with some allowing additional free-text responses. Data were number (%). Free-text responses were analysed descriptively and grouped into existing or newly generated categories where appropriate. RESULTS: Of a possible 227 ICUs, 83 participated (37% response rate). Although 67 sites (81%) acknowledged the importance of follow-up services, only 24 (29%) offered such a service for patients and 21 (25%) for caregivers. Referral timing varied from during hospital admission to 6 months post discharge. Follow-up was predominantly nurse led (n = 13, 48%) and mostly delivered face-to-face (n = 13, 48%). Only seven (27%) of ICUs collected patient-related outcome data, with a wide variety of tools used. The primary barriers to providing follow-up were funding (n = 62, 75%) and limited ICU clinicians to staff a follow-up service (n = 53, 64%). CONCLUSIONS: Approximately a third of participating ICUs in Australia and New Zealand had a follow-up service, limited by financial and ICU clinician staffing constraints. Where follow-up was provided, service characteristics varied greatly. Further data to identify effective models of ICU follow-up care will improve the consistency, equitability, and impact of post-ICU support.

Australian Critical CareVol. 39(4)
Royal Adelaide Hospital (AU), The University of Melbourne (AU), Austin Hospital (AU), Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society (AU), The George Institute for Global Health (AU), Western Health (AU), Melbourne Health (AU)
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Sepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.