Comparison of Neonatal Nurse Practitioners\u27 and Pediatric Residents\u27 Care of Extremely Low-Birth-Weight Infants

Objective: To compare outcomes and charges of health care delivery to extremely low-birth-weight infants by neonatal nurse practitioners (NNP) and pediatric residents. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: A 56-bed neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) in a university teaching hospital. Methods: Study population included all infants with birth weights less than 1000 g who were admitted to the NICU during the 2-year period between September 1, 1994, and August 31, 1996. Infants who died earlier than 12 hours of age, or who were admitted after 1 week of age or with major malformations, chromosomal abnormalities, or congenital infections were excluded. There were separate teams of NNPs and residents providing care around the clock. The study group included 201 infants with birth weights of less than 1000 g. The NNP team cared for 94 infants and the resident team cared for 107 infants. Main Outcome Measures: Survival, length of stay, and total charges. Results: Survival to discharge occurred for 71 NNP team infants (76%) and 82 resident team infants (77%) (P=.87). The median total length of stay was 87 days (range, 39-230 days) for NNP ream infants and 88 days (range, 41-365 days) for resident team infants (P=.54). There were no significant differences between NNP infants and resident team infants in the prevalence of severe intracranial hemorrhage, threshold retinopathy of prematurity, or chronic lung disease at 36 weeks postconceptual age. Median total NICU hospital charges were $141624 (range,$52020-$693018) for NNP team infants and$139388 (range, $50178-$990865) for resident team infants (P=.89). There were no significant differences between NNP team infants and resident team infants in NICU charges for laboratory, radiology, or pharmacy services. Conclusion: Neonatal nurse practitioners and pediatric residents provided comparable patient care to extremely low-birth-weight infants, with similar outcomes and similar charges

Insights into the IMF bailout debate: a review and research agenda

News reports of the International Monetary Fund's (IMF)activities abound in most countries across the globe yet there is little consensus in the literature as to the effectiveness of the IMF's work.The purpose of this study is to provide a systematic review of the IMF literaturethatidentifies the effects of IMF bailouts from the 1970s to the present. We investigate significant elements and consequences of theIMF's bailout policies and implementation approaches such as bailout effectiveness, moral hazard, conditionality, leadership, governance and the sustainability of IMF policy. Based on our review, we develop the 'Spiral of Doom' framework and argue that the effectiveness of the austerity package attached to bailout fundsisquestionablebecause the design of the package overlooks the recipient country's unique economic status and cultural background. We then propose financial engineering solutions as an alternative toIMFbailouts which it is envisagedmay minimize the moral hazard problem associated with bailouts

Risk factors for heart failure in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and stage 4 chronic kidney disease treated with bardoxolone methyl

Background: A phase 3 randomized clinical trial was designed to test whether bardoxolone methyl, a nuclear factor erythroid-2–related factor 2 (Nrf2) activator, slows progression to end-stage renal disease in patients with stage 4 chronic kidney disease and type 2 diabetes mellitus. The trial was terminated because of an increase in heart failure in the bardoxolone methyl group; many of the events were clinically associated with fluid retention.<p></p> Methods and Results: We randomized 2,185 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and stage 4 chronic kidney disease (CKD) (estimated glomerular filtration rate 15 to <30 mL min−1 1.73 m−2) to once-daily bardoxolone methyl (20 mg) or placebo. We used classification and regression tree analysis to identify baseline factors predictive of heart failure or fluid overload events. Elevated baseline B-type natriuretic peptide and previous hospitalization for heart failure were identified as predictors of heart failure events; bardoxolone methyl increased the risk of heart failure by 60% in patients with these risk factors. For patients without these baseline characteristics, the risk for heart failure events among bardoxolone methyl– and placebo-treated patients was similar (2%). The same risk factors were also identified as predictors of fluid overload and appeared to be related to other serious adverse events.<p></p> Conclusions: Bardoxolone methyl contributed to events related to heart failure and/or fluid overload in a subpopulation of susceptible patients with an increased risk for heart failure at baseline. Careful selection of participants and vigilant monitoring of the study drug will be required in any future trials of bardoxolone methyl to mitigate the risk of heart failure and other serious adverse events.<p></p&gt

Return to the workforce following first hospitalization for heart failure: a Danish nationwide cohort study

Background: Return to work is important financially, as a marker of functional status and for self-esteem in patients developing chronic illness. We examined return to work after first heart failure (HF) hospitalization. Methods: By individual-level linkage of nationwide Danish registries, we identified 21455 patients of working age (18-60 years) with a first HF hospitalization in the period of 1997-2012. Of these 11880 (55%) were in the workforce prior to HF hospitalization and comprised the study population. We applied logistic regression to estimate odds ratios (OR) for associations between age, sex, length of hospital stay, level of education, income, comorbidity and return to work. Results: One year after first HF hospitalization, 8040 (67.7%) returned to the workforce, 2981 (25.1%) did not, 805 (6.7%) died and 54 (0.5%) emigrated. Predictors of return to work included younger age (18-30 vs. 51-60 years, OR 3.12; 95% CI 2.42-4.03), male sex (OR 1.22 [1.18-1.34]) and level of education (long-higher vs. basic school OR 2.06 [1.63-2.60]). Conversely, hospital stay >7 days (OR 0.56 [0.51-0.62]) and comorbidity including history of stroke (OR 0.55 [0.45-0.69]), chronic kidney disease (OR 0.46 [0.36-0.59]), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR 0.62 [0.52-0.75]), diabetes (OR 0.76 [0.68-0.85]) and cancer (OR 0.49 [0.40-0.61]) were all significantly associated with lower chance of return to work. Conclusions: Patients in the workforce prior to HF hospitalization had low mortality but high risk of detachment from the workforce one year later. Young age, male sex, and higher level of education were predictors of return to work

Prevalence of prediabetes and undiagnosed diabetes in patients with HFpEF and HFrEF and associated clinical outcomes

Purpose: The prevalence and consequences of prediabetic dysglycemia and undiagnosed diabetes is unknown in patients with heart failure (HF) and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and has not been compared to heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Methods: We examined the prevalence and outcomes associated with normoglycemia, prediabetic dysglycemia and diabetes (diagnosed and undiagnosed) among individuals with a baseline glycated hemoglobin (hemoglobin A1c, HbA1c) measurement stratified by HFrEF or HFpEF in the Candesartan in Heart failure Assessment of Reduction in Mortality and morbidity programme (CHARM). We studied the primary outcome of HF hospitalization or cardiovascular (CV) death, and all-cause death, and estimated hazard ratios (HR) by use of multivariable Cox regression models. Results: HbA1c was measured at baseline in CHARM patients enrolled in the USA and Canada and was available in 1072/3023 (35%) of patients with HFpEF and 1578/4576 (34%) patients with HFrEF. 18 and 16% had normoglycemia (HbA1c < 6.0), 20 and 22% had prediabetes (HbA1c 6.0–6.4), respectively. Finally among patients with HFpEF 22% had undiagnosed diabetes (HbA1c > 6.4), and 40% had known diabetes (any HbA1c), with corresponding prevalence among HFrEF patients being 26 and 35%. The rates of both clinical outcomes of interest were higher in patients with undiagnosed diabetes and prediabetes, compared to normoglycemic patients, irrespective of HF subtype, and in general higher among HFrEF patients. For the primary composite outcome among HFpEF patients, the HRs were 1.02 (95% CI 0.63–1.65) for prediabetes, HR 1.18 (0.75–1.86) for undiagnosed diabetes and 2.75 (1.83–4.11) for known diabetes, respectively, p value for trend across groups < 0.001. Dysglycemia was also associated with worse outcomes in HFrEF. Conclusions: These findings confirm the remarkably high prevalence of dysglycemia in heart failure irrespective of ejection fraction phenotype, and demonstrate that dysglycemia is associated with a higher risk of adverse clinical outcomes, even before the diagnosis of diabetes and institution of glucose lowering therapy in patients with HFpEF as well as HFrEF

Type of atrial fibrillation and clinical outcomes in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction

Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is common in heart failure (HF), but the outcome by type of AF is largely unknown. Objectives: This study investigated outcomes related to type of AF (paroxysmal, persistent or permanent, or new onset) in 2 recent large trials in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction. Methods: The study analyzed patients in the PARADIGM-HF (Prospective comparison of ARNI with ACEI to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and morbidity in Heart Failure) and ATMOSPHERE (Aliskiren Trial to Minimize Outcomes in Patients with Heart Failure) trials. Multivariable Cox regression models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for outcomes related to AF type. Results: Of 15,415 patients, 5,481 (35.6%) had a history of AF at randomization, and of these, 1,645 (30.0%) had paroxysmal AF. Compared with patients without AF, patients with paroxysmal AF at randomization had a higher risk of the primary composite endpoint of cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization (HR: 1.20; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.09 to 1.32; p < 0.001), HF hospitalization (HR: 1.34; 95% CI: 1.19 to 1.51; < 0.001), and stroke (HR: 1.34; 95% CI: 1.02 to 1.76; p = 0.037), whereas the corresponding risks in patients with persistent or permanent AF were not elevated. Neither type of AF was associated with higher mortality. New onset AF was associated with the greatest risk of adverse outcomes: primary endpoint (HR: 2.21; 95% CI: 1.80 to 2.71), HF hospitalization (HR: 2.11; 95% CI: 1.58 to 2.81), stroke (HR: 2.20; 95% CI: 1.25 to 3.88), and all-cause mortality (HR: 2.26; 95% CI: 1.86 to 2.74), all p values < 0.001, compared with patients without AF. Anticoagulants were used less often in patients with paroxysmal (53%) and new onset (16%) AF than in patients with persistent or permanent AF (71%). Conclusions: Among HF patients with a history of AF, those with paroxysmal AF were at greater risk of HF hospitalization and stroke than were patients with persistent or permanent AF, underlining the importance of anticoagulant therapy. New onset AF was associated with increased risk of all outcomes. (Prospective comparison of ARNI with ACEI to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure [PARADIGM-HF]; NCT01035255) (Aliskiren Trial to Minimize Outcomes in Patients with Heart Failure [ATMOSPHERE]; NCT00853658

Practical approach on frail older patients attended for acute heart failure

Acute heart failure (AHF) is a multi-organ dysfunction syndrome. In addition to known cardiac dysfunction, non-cardiac comorbidity, frailty and disability are independent risk factors of mortality, morbidity, cognitive and functional decline, and risk of institutionalization. Frailty, a treatable and potential reversible syndrome very common in older patients with AHF, increases the risk of disability and other adverse health outcomes. This position paper highlights the need to identify frailty in order to improve prognosis, the risk-benefits of invasive diagnostic and therapeutic procedures, and the definition of older-person-centered and integrated care plans

Valsartan for attenuating disease evolution in early sarcomeric hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: the design of the Valsartan for Attenuating Disease Evolution in Early Sarcomeric Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy (VANISH) trial

Background: Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is often caused by sarcomere gene mutations, resulting in left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH), myocardial fibrosis, and increased risk of sudden cardiac death and heart failure. Studies in mouse models of sarcomeric HCM demonstrated that early treatment with an angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) reduced development of LVH and fibrosis. In contrast, prior human studies using ARBs for HCM have targeted heterogeneous adult cohorts with well-established disease. The VANISH trial is testing the safety and feasibility of disease-modifying therapy with an ARB in genotyped HCM patients with early disease. Methods: A randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trial is being conducted in sarcomere mutation carriers, 8 to 45 years old, with HCM and no/minimal symptoms, or those with early phenotypic manifestations but no LVH. Participants are randomly assigned to receive valsartan 80 to 320 mg daily (depending on age and weight) or placebo. The primary endpoint is a composite of 9 z-scores in domains representing myocardial injury/hemodynamic stress, cardiac morphology, and function. Total z-scores reflecting change from baseline to final visits will be compared between treatment groups. Secondary endpoints will assess the impact of treatment on mutation carriers without LVH, and analyze the influence of age, sex, and genotype. Conclusions: The VANISH trial is testing a new strategy of disease modification for treating sarcomere mutation carriers with early HCM, and those at risk for its development. In addition, further insight into disease mechanisms, response to therapy, and phenotypic evolution will be gained

Sacubitril/valsartan reduces serum uric acid concentration, an independent predictor of adverse outcomes in PARADIGM-HF

Aims: Elevated serum uric acid concentration (SUA) has been associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease, but this may be due to unmeasured confounders. We examined the association between SUA and outcomes as well as the effect of sacubitril/valsartan on SUA in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) in PARADIGM-HF. Methods and results: The association between SUA and the primary composite outcome of cardiovascular death or heart failure (HF) hospitalization, its components, and all-cause mortality was examined using Cox regression analyses among 8213 patients using quintiles (Q1–Q5) of SUA adjusted for baseline prognostic variables including estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), diuretic dose, and log N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide. Change in SUA from baseline over 12 months was also evaluated in each treatment group. Patients in Q5 (SUA ≥8.6 mg/dL) compared with Q1 (<5.4 mg/dL) were younger (62.8 vs. 64.2 years), more often male (88.7% vs. 63.1%), had lower systolic blood pressure (119 vs. 123 mmHg), lower eGFR (57.4 vs. 76.6 mL/min/1.73 m2), and greater diuretic use. Higher SUA was associated with a higher risk of the primary outcome (adjusted hazard ratios) Q5 vs. Q1 = 1.28 [95% confidence intervals (1.09–1.50), P = 0.003], cardiovascular death [1.44 (1.11–1.77), P = 0.001], HF hospitalization [1.37 (1.11–1.70), P = 0.004], and all-cause mortality [1.36 (1.13–1.64), P = 0.001]. Compared with enalapril, sacubitril/valsartan reduced SUA by 0.24 (0.17–0.32) mg/dL over 12 months (P < 0.0001). Sacubitril/valsartan improved outcomes, irrespective of SUA concentration. Conclusion: Serum uric acid concentration was an independent predictor of worse outcomes after multivariable adjustment in patients with HFrEF. Compared with enalapril, sacubitril/valsartan reduced SUA and improved outcomes irrespective of SUA

Clinical and echocardiographic characteristics and cardiovascular outcomes according to diabetes status in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction. A report from the Irbesartan in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction Trial (I-Preserve)

Background—In patients with HF and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), little is known about the characteristics of and outcomes in those with and without diabetes. Methods—We examined clinical and echocardiographic characteristics and outcomes in the Irbesartan in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction trial (I-Preserve), according to history of diabetes. Cox regression models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HR) for cardiovascular outcomes adjusted for known predictors, including age, sex, natriuretic peptides, and comorbidity. Echocardiographic data were available in 745 patients and were additionally adjusted for in supplementary analyses. Results—Overall, 1134 of 4128 patients (27%) had diabetes. Compared to those without diabetes, they were more likely to have a history of myocardial infarction (28% vs. 22%), higher BMI (31kg/m2 vs. 29kg/m2), worse Minnesota living with HF score (48 vs. 40), higher median NT-proBNP concentration (403 vs 320 pg/ml; all p<0.01), more signs of congestion but no significant difference in LVEF. Patients with diabetes had a greater left ventricular (LV) mass and left atrial area than patients without diabetes. Doppler E wave velocity (86 vs 76 cm/sec, p<0.0001) and the ratio of E/e' (11.7 vs 10.4, p=0.010) were higher in patients with diabetes. Over a median follow-up of 4.1 years, cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization occurred in 34% of patients with diabetes vs. 22% of those without diabetes; adjusted HR 1.75 (95% CI 1.49-2.05) and 28% vs. 19% of patients with and without diabetes died; adjusted HR 1.59 (1.33-1.91). Conclusions—In HFpEF, patients with diabetes have more signs of congestion, worse quality of life, higher NT-proBNP levels, and a poorer prognosis. They also display greater structural and functional echocardiographic abnormalities. Further investigation is needed to determine the mediators of the adverse impact of diabetes on outcomes in HFPEF, and whether they are modifiable