The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Prevalence of Nosocomial Infection in Intensive Care Units in Europe: Results of the European Prevalence of Infection in Intensive Care (EPIC) Study
Abstract
Objective. —To determine the prevalence of intensive care unit (ICU)—acquired infections and the risk factors for these infections, identify the predominant infecting organisms, and evaluate the relationship between ICU-acquired infection and mortality. Design. —A 1-day point-prevalence study. Setting. —Intensive care units in 17 countries in Western Europe, excluding coronary care units and pediatric and special care infant units. Patients. —All patients (>10 years of age) occupying an ICU bed over a 24-hour period. A total of 1417 ICUs provided 10 038 patient case reports. Main Outcome Measures. —Rates of ICU-acquired infection, prescription of antimicrobials, resistance patterns of microbiological isolates, and potential risk factors for ICU-acquired infection and death. Results. —A total of 4501 patients (44.8%) were infected, and 2064 (20.6%) had ICU-acquired infection. Pneumonia (46.9%), lower respiratory tract infection (17.8%), urinary tract infection (17.6%), and bloodstream infection (12%) were the most frequent types of ICU infection reported. Most frequently reported microorganisms were Enterobacteriaceae (34.4%),Staphylococcus aureus(30.1%; [60% resistant to methicillin]),Pseudomonas aeruginosa(28.7%), coagulase-negative staphylococci (19.1%), and fungi (17.1%). Seven risk factors for ICU-acquired infection were identified: increasing length of ICU stay (>48 hours), mechanical ventilation, diagnosis of trauma, central venous, pulmonary artery, and urinary catheterization, and stress ulcer prophylaxis. ICU-acquired pneumonia (odds ratio [OR], 1.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.6 to 2.29), clinical sepsis (OR, 3.50; 95% CI, 1.71 to 7.18), and bloodstream infection (OR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.25 to 2.41) increased the risk of ICU death. Conclusions. —ICU-acquired infection is common and often associated with microbiological isolates of resistant organisms. The potential effects on outcome emphasize the importance of specific measures for infection control in critically ill patients. (JAMA. 1995;274:639-644)
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Hidron, A. I., Edwards, J. R., Patel, J., Horan, T. C., Sievert, D. M., Pollock, D. A., Fridkin, S. K., & National Healthcare Safety Network Team and Participating National Healthcare Safety Network Facilities (2008) · Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology · doi:10.1086/591861 · Cited by 3,724
Vincent, J.-L., de Mendonca, A., Cantraine, F., Moreno, R., Takala, J., Suter, P. M., Sprung, C. L., Colardyn, F., & Blecher, S. (1998) · Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1097/00003246-199811000-00016 · Cited by 3,463
Self-citationCecconi, M., Evans, L., Levy, M., & Rhodes, A. (2018) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(18)30696-2 · Cited by 2,254
Inadequate Antimicrobial Treatment of Infections
Kollef, M. H., Sherman, G., Ward, S., & Fraser, V. J. (1999) · Chest · doi:10.1378/chest.115.2.462 · Cited by 1,805
Chastre, J., Wolff, M., Fagon, J.-Y., Chevret, S., Thomas, F., Wermert, D., Clementi, E., Gonzalez, J., Jusserand, D., Asfar, P., et al. (2003) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.290.19.2588 · Cited by 1,376
Metadata
- Authors
- Vincent, J.-L.
- Venue
- JAMA
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 1995-08-23
- Volume
- 274
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 639
- ISSN
- 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
- 0098-7484
- OpenAlex
- W4294990605
- Cited by
- 1,632
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 31.47
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Prevalence of Nosocomial Infection in Intensive Care Units in Europe: Results of the European Prevalence of Infection in Intensive Care (EPIC) Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.1995.03530080055041
- The paper
- Vincent, J.-L. (1995). The Prevalence of Nosocomial Infection in Intensive Care Units in Europe: Results of the European Prevalence of Infection in Intensive Care (EPIC) Study. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1995.03530080055041
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.