Critical care (London, England) Journal Impact Factor & Information
Critical Care is a high quality, peer-reviewed, international clinical medical journal. Critical Care aims to improve the care of critically ill patients by acquiring, discussing, distributing, and promoting evidence-based information relevant to intensivists. The journal publishes commentaries, reviews, and research in all areas of intensive care and emergency medicine. Critical Care aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the intensive care field.
Current impact factor: 4.48
Impact Factor Rankings
|2015 Impact Factor||Available summer 2016|
|2014 Impact Factor||4.476|
|Website||Critical Care website|
|Other titles||Critical care (London, England: Online), Critical care, CC|
|Material type||Document, Periodical, Internet resource|
|Document type||Internet Resource, Computer File, Journal / Magazine / Newspaper|
- Author can archive a pre-print version
- Author can archive a post-print version
- Publisher's version/PDF may be used
- Eligible UK authors may deposit in OpenDepot
- Creative Commons Attribution License
- Copy of License must accompany any deposit.
- All titles are open access journals
- 'BioMed Central' is an imprint of 'Springer Verlag (Germany)'
- Classification green
Publications in this journal
- SourceAvailable from: PubMed Central[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: This article is one of ten reviews selected from the Annual Update in Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine 2015 and co-published as a series in Critical Care. Other articles in the series can be found online at http://ccforum.com/series/annualupdate2015 . Further information about the Annual Update in Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine is available from http://www.springer.com/series/8901 .Critical care (London, England) 12/2015; 19(1):806. DOI:10.1186/s13054-015-0806-z
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Intensive care unit (ICU) environmental factors such as noise and light have been cited as important causes of sleep deprivation in critically ill patients. Previous studies indicated that using earplugs and eye masks can improve REM sleep in healthy subjects in simulated ICU environment, and improve sleep quality in ICU patients. This study aimed to determine the effects of using earplugs and eye masks with relaxing background music on sleep, melatonin and cortisol levels in ICU patients. Fifty patients who underwent a scheduled cardiac surgery and were expected to stay at least 2 nights in Cardiac Surgical ICU (CSICU) were included. They were randomized to sleep with or without earplugs and eye masks combined with 30-minute relaxing music during the postoperative nights in CSICU. Urine was analyzed for nocturnal melatonin and cortisol levels. Subjective sleep quality was evaluated using the Chinese version of Richards-Campbell Sleep Questionnaire (a visual analog scale, ranging 0-100). Data from 45 patients (20 in intervention group, 25 in control group) were analyzed. Significant differences were found between groups in depth of sleep, falling asleep, awakenings, falling asleep again after awakening and overall sleep quality (P < 0.05). Perceived sleep quality was better in the intervention group. No group differences were found in urinary melatonin levels and cortisol levels for the night before surgery, and the first and second nights post-surgery (P > 0.05). The urinary melatonin levels of the first and second postoperative nights were significantly lower than those of the night before surgery (P = 0.01). The opposite pattern was seen with urinary cortisol levels (P = 0.00). This combination of non-pharmacological interventions is useful for promoting sleep in ICU adult patients; however, any influence on nocturnal melatonin levels and cortisol level may have been masked by several factors such as the timing of surgery, medication use and individual differences. Larger scale studies would be needed to examine the potential influences of these factors on biological markers and intervention efficacy on sleep. Chinese Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR-IOR-14005511 . Registered 21 November 2014.Critical care (London, England) 12/2015; 19(1):855. DOI:10.1186/s13054-015-0855-3
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Evidence behind the recommendations for protein feeding during critical illness is weak. Mechanistic studies are needed to elucidate the effects of amino acid/protein supplementation on protein metabolism before larger clinical trials with higher protein feeding are initiated. Here we study the effects of parenteral amino acid supplementation (equivalent to 1 g/kg/day) over 3 h on whole body protein turnover in critically ill patients in the ICU during the first week after admission. Patients were studied at baseline during ongoing nutrition and during extra amino acid supplementation. If the patient was still in the ICU 2-4 days later, these measurements were repeated. Protein kinetics were measured using continuous stable isotope labeled phenylalanine and tyrosine infusions. Thirteen patients were studied on the first study occasion only and 7 were studied twice. Parenteral amino acid supplementation significantly improved protein balance on both occasions; from median -4 to +7 μmol phenylalanine/kg/h (P = 0.001) on the first study day and from median 0 to +12 μmol phenylalanine/kg/h (P = 0.018) on the second study day. The more positive protein balance was attributed to an increased protein synthesis rate which reached statistical significance during the first measurement (from 58 to 65 μmol phenylalanine/kg/h; n = 13; P = 0.007) but not during the second measurement (from 58 to 69 μmol phenylalanine/kg/h; n = 7; P = 0.09). Amino acid oxidation rates, estimated by phenylalanine hydroxylation, did not increase during the 3 h amino acid infusion. A positive correlation (r = 0.80; P < 0.0001)) between total amino acids/protein given to the patient and whole body protein balance was observed. Extra parenteral amino acids infused over a 3 hour period improved whole body protein balance and did not increase amino acid oxidation rates in critically ill patients during the early phase (first week) of critical illness.Critical care (London, England) 12/2015; 19(1):844. DOI:10.1186/s13054-015-0844-6
- Critical care (London, England) 12/2015; 19(1):213. DOI:10.1186/s13054-015-0870-4
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: This article is one of ten reviews selected from the Annual Update in Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine 2015 and co-published as a series in Critical Care. Other articles in the series can be found online at http://ccforum.com/series/annualupdate2015 . Further information about the Annual Update in Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine is available from http://www.springer.com/series/8901 .Critical care (London, England) 12/2015; 19(1):803. DOI:10.1186/s13054-015-0803-2
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.