Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 217

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Association Between US Norepinephrine Shortage and Mortality Among Patients With Septic Shock

Vail, Emily, Gershengorn, Hayley B., Hua, May, Walkey, Allan J., Rubenfeld, Gordon, Wunsch, Hannah·2017·JAMA

Abstract

Importance: Drug shortages in the United States are common, but their effect on patient care and outcomes has rarely been reported. Objective: To assess changes to patient care and outcomes associated with a 2011 national shortage of norepinephrine, the first-line vasopressor for septic shock. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort study of 26 US hospitals in the Premier Healthcare Database with a baseline rate of norepinephrine use of at least 60% for patients with septic shock. The cohort included adults with septic shock admitted to study hospitals between July 1, 2008, and June 30, 2013 (n = 27 835). Exposures: Hospital-level norepinephrine shortage was defined as any quarterly (3-month) interval in 2011 during which the hospital rate of norepinephrine use decreased by more than 20% from baseline. Main Outcomes and Measures: Use of alternative vasopressors was assessed and a multilevel mixed-effects logistic regression model was used to evaluate the association between admission to a hospital during a norepinephrine shortage quarter and in-hospital mortality. Results: Among 27 835 patients (median age, 69 years [interquartile range, 57-79 years]; 47.0% women) with septic shock in 26 hospitals that demonstrated at least 1 quarter of norepinephrine shortage in 2011, norepinephrine use among cohort patients declined from 77.0% (95% CI, 76.2%-77.8%) of patients before the shortage to a low of 55.7% (95% CI, 52.0%-58.4%) in the second quarter of 2011; phenylephrine was the most frequently used alternative vasopressor during this time (baseline, 36.2% [95% CI, 35.3%-37.1%]; maximum, 54.4% [95% CI, 51.8%-57.2%]). Compared with hospital admission with septic shock during quarters of normal use, hospital admission during quarters of shortage was associated with an increased rate of in-hospital mortality (9283 of 25 874 patients [35.9%] vs 777 of 1961 patients [39.6%], respectively; absolute risk increase = 3.7% [95% CI, 1.5%-6.0%]; adjusted odds ratio = 1.15 [95% CI, 1.01-1.30]; P = .03). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with septic shock in US hospitals affected by the 2011 norepinephrine shortage, the most commonly administered alternative vasopressor was phenylephrine. Patients admitted to these hospitals during times of shortage had higher in-hospital mortality.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.2017.2841

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cites

Show all 7 references

Cited by

See all 217

Metadata

Authors
Vail, E., Gershengorn, H. B., Hua, M., Walkey, A. J., Rubenfeld, G., & Wunsch, H.
Venue
JAMA
Published
2017-04-11
Volume
317
Issue
14
Pages
1433
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W2602745009
Cited by
217
References
7
FWCI
16.88
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: Association Between US Norepinephrine Shortage and Mortality Among Patients With Septic Shock. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.2017.2841
The paper
Vail, E., Gershengorn, H. B., Hua, M., Walkey, A. J., Rubenfeld, G., & Wunsch, H. (2017). Association Between US Norepinephrine Shortage and Mortality Among Patients With Septic Shock. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2017.2841

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.