Broad-scale patterns of body size in squamate reptiles of Europe and North America

Aim To document geographical interspecific patterns of body size of European and North American squamate reptile assemblages and explore the relationship between body size patterns and environmental gradients. Location North America and western Europe. Methods We processed distribution maps for native species of squamate reptiles to document interspecific spatial variation of body size at a grain size of 110 x 110 km. We also examined seven environmental variables linked to four hypotheses possibly influencing body size gradients. We used simple and multiple regression, evaluated using information theory, to identify the set of models best supported by the data. Results Europe is characterized by clear latitudinal trends in body size, whereas geographical variation in body size in North America is complex. There is a consistent association of mean body size with measures of ambient energy in both regions, although lizards increase in size northwards whereas snakes show the opposite pattern. Our best models accounted for almost 60% of the variation in body size of lizards and snakes within Europe, but the proportions of variance explained in North America were less than 20%. Main conclusions Although body size influences the energy balance of thermoregulating ectotherms, inconsistent biogeographical patterns and contrasting associations with energy in lizards and snakes suggest that no single mechanism can explain variation of reptile body size in the northern temperate zone

Race/Ethnic Differences in Outcomes Among Hospitalized Medicare Patients With Heart Failure and Preserved Ejection Fraction.

ObjectivesThis study analyzed HFpEF patient characteristics and clinical outcomes according to race/ethnicity and adjusted for patient and hospital characteristics along with socioeconomic status (SES).BackgroundThe proportion of hospitalizations for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) has increased over the last decade. Whether the short- and long-term outcomes differ between racial/ethnic groups is not well described.MethodsThe Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure registry was linked to Medicare administrative data to identify hospitalized patients with HFpEF ≥65 years of age with left ventricular ejection fraction ≥50% between 2006 and 2014. Cox proportional hazards models were used to report hazard ratios (HRs) for 30-day and 1-year readmission and mortality rates with sequential adjustments for patient characteristics, hospital characteristics, and SES.ResultsThe final cohort included 53,065 patients with HFpEF. Overall 30-day mortality was 5.87%; at 1 year, it was 33.1%. The 30-day all-cause readmission rate was 22.2%, and it was 67.0% at 1 year. After adjusting for patient characteristics, hospital characteristics, and SES, 30-day mortality was lower for black patients (HR: 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.71 to 0.98; p = 0.031) and Hispanic patients (HR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.64 to 0.96; p = 0.017) compared with white patients. One-year mortality was lower for black patients (HR: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.87 to 0.99; p = 0.031), Hispanic patients (HR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.75 to 0.91; p < 0.001), and Asian patients (HR: 0.76; 95% CI: 0.66 to 0.88; p < 0.001) compared with white patients. Black patients had a higher risk of readmission at 30 days (HR: 1.09; 95% CI: 1.02 to 1.16; p = 0.012) and 1 year (HR: 1.14; 95% CI: 1.09 to 1.20; p < 0.001) compared with white patients.ConclusionsBlack, Hispanic, and Asian patients had a lower mortality risk after a hospitalization for HFpEF compared with white patients; black patients had higher readmission rates. These differences in mortality and readmission risk according to race/ethnicity persisted after adjusting for patient characteristics, SES, and hospital factors

Medicare Expenditures by Race/Ethnicity After Hospitalization for Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction.

ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to analyze cumulative Medicare expenditures at index admission and after discharge by race or ethnicity.BackgroundHeart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a growing proportion of heart failure (HF) admissions. Research on health care expenditures for patients with HFpEF is limited.MethodsRecords of patients discharged from the Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure registry between 2006 and 2014 were linked to Medicare data. The primary outcome was unadjusted payments for acute care services. Comparisons between race/ethnic groups were made using generalized linear mixed models. Cost ratios were reported by race/ethnicity, and adjustments were made sequentially for patient characteristics, hospital factors, and regional socioeconomic status.ResultsMedian Medicare costs for index hospitalizations were $7,241 for the entire cohort,$7,049 for whites, $8,269 for blacks,$8,808 for Hispanics, $8,477 for Asians, and$8,963 for other races. Median costs at 30 days for readmitted patients were $9,803 and$17,456 for the entire cohort at 1-year. No significant differences were seen in index admission cost ratios by race/ethnicity. At 30 days among readmitted patients, costs were 9% higher (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1% to 17%; p = 0.020) for blacks in the fully adjusted model than whites. At 1 year, costs were 14% higher (95% CI: 9% to 18%; p < 0.001) for blacks, 7% higher (95% CI: 0% to 14%; p = 0.041) for Hispanics, and 24% higher (95% CI: 8% to 42%; p = 0.003) for patients of other races. No significant differences between white and Asian expenditures were noted.ConclusionsMinority patients with HFpEF have greater acute care service costs. Further research of improving care delivery is needed to reduce acute care use for vulnerable populations

Medicare Expenditures by Race/Ethnicity After Hospitalization for Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction.

OBJECTIVES:The purpose of this study was to analyze cumulative Medicare expenditures at index admission and after discharge by race or ethnicity. BACKGROUND:Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a growing proportion of heart failure (HF) admissions. Research on health care expenditures for patients with HFpEF is limited. METHODS:Records of patients discharged from the Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure registry between 2006 and 2014 were linked to Medicare data. The primary outcome was unadjusted payments for acute care services. Comparisons between race/ethnic groups were made using generalized linear mixed models. Cost ratios were reported by race/ethnicity, and adjustments were made sequentially for patient characteristics, hospital factors, and regional socioeconomic status. RESULTS:Median Medicare costs for index hospitalizations were $7,241 for the entire cohort,$7,049 for whites, $8,269 for blacks,$8,808 for Hispanics, $8,477 for Asians, and$8,963 for other races. Median costs at 30 days for readmitted patients were $9,803 and$17,456 for the entire cohort at 1-year. No significant differences were seen in index admission cost ratios by race/ethnicity. At 30 days among readmitted patients, costs were 9% higher (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1% to 17%; p = 0.020) for blacks in the fully adjusted model than whites. At 1 year, costs were 14% higher (95% CI: 9% to 18%; p < 0.001) for blacks, 7% higher (95% CI: 0% to 14%; p = 0.041) for Hispanics, and 24% higher (95% CI: 8% to 42%; p = 0.003) for patients of other races. No significant differences between white and Asian expenditures were noted. CONCLUSIONS:Minority patients with HFpEF have greater acute care service costs. Further research of improving care delivery is needed to reduce acute care use for vulnerable populations

Association of Dual Eligibility for Medicare and Medicaid With Heart Failure Quality and Outcomes Among Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure Hospitals.

ImportanceThe Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services uses a new peer group-based payment system to compare hospital performance as part of its Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program, which classifies hospitals into quintiles based on their share of dual-eligible beneficiaries for Medicare and Medicaid. However, little is known about the association of a hospital's share of dual-eligible beneficiaries with the quality of care and outcomes for patients with heart failure (HF).ObjectiveTo evaluate the association between a hospital's proportion of patients with dual eligibility for Medicare and Medicaid and HF quality of care and outcomes.Design, setting, and participantsThis retrospective cohort study evaluated 436 196 patients hospitalized for HF using the Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure registry from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2017. The analysis included patients 65 years or older with available data on dual-eligibility status. Hospitals were divided into quintiles based on their share of dual-eligible patients. Quality and outcomes were analyzed using unadjusted and adjusted multivariable logistic regression models. Data analysis was performed from April 1, 2020, to January 1, 2021.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was 30-day all-cause readmission. The secondary outcomes included in-hospital mortality, 30-day HF readmissions, 30-day all-cause mortality, and HF process of care measures.ResultsA total of 436 196 hospitalized HF patients 65 years or older from 535 hospital sites were identified, with 258 995 hospitalized patients (median age, 81 years; interquartile range, 74-87 years) at 455 sites meeting the study criteria and included in the primary analysis. A total of 258 995 HF hospitalizations from 455 sites were included in the primary analysis of the study. Hospitals in the highest dual-eligibility quintile (quintile 5) tended to care for patients who were younger, were more likely to be female, belonged to racial minority groups, or were located in rural areas compared with quintile 1 sites. After multivariable adjustment, hospitals with the highest quintile of dual eligibility were associated with lower rates of key process measures, including evidence-based β-blocker prescription, measure of left ventricular function, and anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter. Differences in clinical outcomes were seen with higher 30-day all-cause (adjusted odds ratio, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.14-1.35) and HF (adjusted odds ratio, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.03-1.27) readmissions in higher dual-eligible quintile 5 sites compared with quintile 1 sites. Risk-adjusted in-hospital and 30-day mortality did not significantly differ in quintile 1 vs quintile 5 hospitals.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study, hospitals with a higher share of dual-eligible patients provided care with lower rates of some of the key HF quality of care process measures and with higher 30-day all-cause or HF readmissions compared with lower dual-eligibility quintile hospitals

Association of Dual Eligibility for Medicare and Medicaid With Heart Failure Quality and Outcomes Among Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure Hospitals.

ImportanceThe Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services uses a new peer group-based payment system to compare hospital performance as part of its Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program, which classifies hospitals into quintiles based on their share of dual-eligible beneficiaries for Medicare and Medicaid. However, little is known about the association of a hospital's share of dual-eligible beneficiaries with the quality of care and outcomes for patients with heart failure (HF).ObjectiveTo evaluate the association between a hospital's proportion of patients with dual eligibility for Medicare and Medicaid and HF quality of care and outcomes.Design, setting, and participantsThis retrospective cohort study evaluated 436 196 patients hospitalized for HF using the Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure registry from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2017. The analysis included patients 65 years or older with available data on dual-eligibility status. Hospitals were divided into quintiles based on their share of dual-eligible patients. Quality and outcomes were analyzed using unadjusted and adjusted multivariable logistic regression models. Data analysis was performed from April 1, 2020, to January 1, 2021.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was 30-day all-cause readmission. The secondary outcomes included in-hospital mortality, 30-day HF readmissions, 30-day all-cause mortality, and HF process of care measures.ResultsA total of 436 196 hospitalized HF patients 65 years or older from 535 hospital sites were identified, with 258 995 hospitalized patients (median age, 81 years; interquartile range, 74-87 years) at 455 sites meeting the study criteria and included in the primary analysis. A total of 258 995 HF hospitalizations from 455 sites were included in the primary analysis of the study. Hospitals in the highest dual-eligibility quintile (quintile 5) tended to care for patients who were younger, were more likely to be female, belonged to racial minority groups, or were located in rural areas compared with quintile 1 sites. After multivariable adjustment, hospitals with the highest quintile of dual eligibility were associated with lower rates of key process measures, including evidence-based β-blocker prescription, measure of left ventricular function, and anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter. Differences in clinical outcomes were seen with higher 30-day all-cause (adjusted odds ratio, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.14-1.35) and HF (adjusted odds ratio, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.03-1.27) readmissions in higher dual-eligible quintile 5 sites compared with quintile 1 sites. Risk-adjusted in-hospital and 30-day mortality did not significantly differ in quintile 1 vs quintile 5 hospitals.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study, hospitals with a higher share of dual-eligible patients provided care with lower rates of some of the key HF quality of care process measures and with higher 30-day all-cause or HF readmissions compared with lower dual-eligibility quintile hospitals

Long-term outcomes for heart failure patients with and without diabetes: From the Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure Registry.

BackgroundDiabetes mellitus is an increasingly prevalent condition among heart failure (HF) patients. The long-term morbidity and mortality among patients with and without diabetes with HF with reduced (HFrEF), borderline (HFbEF), and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) are not well described.MethodsUsing the Get With The Guidelines (GWTG)-HF Registry linked to Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services claims data, we evaluated differences between HF patients with and without diabetes. Adjusted Cox proportional-hazard models controlling for patient and hospital characteristics were used to evaluate mortality and readmission outcomes.ResultsA cohort of 86,659 HF patients aged ≥65 years was followed for 3 years from discharge. Unadjusted all-cause mortality was between 4.4% and 5.5% and all-cause hospitalization was between 19.4% and 22.6% for all groups at 30 days. For all-cause mortality at 3 years from hospital discharge, diabetes was associated with an adjusted hazard ratio of 1.27 (95% CI 1.07-1.49, P = .0051) for HFrEF, 0.95 (95% CI 0.55-1.65, P = .8536) for HFbEF, 1.02 (95% CI 0.87-1.19, P = .8551) for HFpEF. For all-cause readmission, diabetes was associated with an adjusted hazard ratio of 1.06 (95% CI 0.87-1.29, P = .5585) for HFrEF, 1.48 (95% CI 1.15-1.90, P = .0023) for HFbEF, and 1.06 (95% CI 0.91-1.22, P = .4747) for HFpEF.ConclusionsHFrEF and HFbEF patients with diabetes are at increased risk for mortality and rehospitalization after hospitalization for HF, independent of other patient and hospital characteristics. Among HFpEF patients, diabetes does not appear to be independently associated with significant additional risks