Additional benefits of passive exposures to intermittent hypoxia and hyperoxia on cognitive performance and functional exercise capacity have been demonstrated in geriatric patients who performed a multimodal training program. The main goal of the present study was to evaluate effects of adding intermittent hypoxic-hyperoxic training (IHHT) to a multimodal training intervention (MTI) on mobility and perceived health in old individuals at a Geriatric Day Hospital. Thirty-four patients between 64 and 92 years participated in the double blind, randomized and controlled clinical trial. The elderly patients attended in a 5–7 weeks lasting MTI (strength, endurance, balance, reaction, flexibility, coordination, and cognitive exercises) and performed IHHT (breathing 10–14% oxygen for 4–7 min followed by 2–4 min 30–40% oxygen) in the Hypoxic Group (HG) or placebo treatment with ambient air in the Normoxic Group (NG) in parallel. Before and after all treatments, mobility was assessed by the Tinetti Mobility Test (TMT), the Timed-Up-and-Go Test (TUG) and Barthel-Index, while perceived health was assessed by one part of the EQ-5D Test, the EQ visual analogue scale (EQ VAS). After the MTI plus IHHT or normoxia sessions, results of the TMT, TUG, Barthel Index and EQ-VAS revealed no significant difference between HG and NG (+ 14.9% vs + 15.4%, p = 0.25; − 21% vs − 26.3%, p = 0.51; + 4.2% vs + 3.6%, p = 0.56; + 37.9% vs + 33.9%, p = 0.24;). IHHT added to MTI did not elicit additional improvements in perceived health and mobility compared to MTI alone.

Background: Post-intensive care syndrome encompasses physical, cognitive, and psychological impairments that persist in patients after discharge from an intensive care unit. There is considerable variation in the tools used for assessment. This systematic review aimed to summarize the consensus-based recommendations for assessing post-intensive care syndrome. Methods: A comprehensive literature search identified four consensus-based guidelines. A quality assessment carried out using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II tool demonstrated high methodological standards across all the included papers. Results: The guidelines consistently emphasize assessing cognition, mental health, and physical function as the core domains. However, there are notable differences in the specific tools recommended. Major et al. focused on physical examinations, while Mikkelsen et al. proposed a fundamental package of five tools covering the key domains. Spies et al. aimed for a pragmatic set of freely available instruments administrable within 30 min. Nakanishi et al. provided a detailed ranking of instruments for each domain. The availability of validated translations varied considerably across languages. Some tools developed specifically for post-intensive care syndrome were not considered by any consensus conference. Conclusions: Further work is needed to establish a universally accepted standard for assessing post-intensive care syndrome that considers practical implementation across diverse settings and languages.