Purpose of review Here, we discuss the interpretation and modeling of gene-environment interactions in hypertension related phenotypes, with a focus on the necessary assumptions and possible challenges. Recent findings Recently, small cohort studies have discovered several novel genetic variants associated with hypertension-related phenotypes through modeling gene-environment interactions. Several consortia-based meta-analytic efforts have uncovered many novel genetic variants in hypertension without modeling interaction terms, giving promise to future meta-analytic efforts that incorporate gene-environment interactions. Summary Heritability studies and genome-wide association studies have established that hypertension, a prevalent cardiovascular disease, has a genetic component that may be modulated by the environment (such as lifestyle factors). This review includes a discussion of known genetic associations for hypertension/blood pressure, including those resulting from the incorporation of gene-environmental interaction modeling.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the US federal government required that skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) close to visitors and eliminate communal activities. Although these policies were intended to protect residents, they may have had unintended negative effects. OBJECTIVE To assess health outcomes among SNFs with and without known COVID-19 cases. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This retrospective observational study used US Medicare claims and Minimum Data Set 3.0 for January through November in each year beginning in 2018 and ending in 2020 including 15 477 US SNFs with 2 985 864 resident-years.

Background Excess mortality from cardiovascular disease during the COVID‐19 pandemic has been reported. The mechanism is unclear but may include delay or deferral of care, or differential treatment during hospitalization because of strains on hospital capacity. Methods and Results We used emergency department and inpatient data from a 12‐hospital health system to examine changes in volume, patient age and comorbidities, treatment (right‐ and left‐heart catheterization), and outcomes for patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and heart failure (HF) during the COVID‐19 pandemic compared with pre‐COVID‐19 (2018 and 2019), controlling for seasonal variation. We analyzed 27 427 emergency department visits or hospitalizations. Patient volume decreased during COVID‐19 for both HF and AMI, but age, race, sex, and medical comorbidities were similar before and during COVID‐19 for both groups. Acuity increased for AMI as measured by the proportion of patients with ST‐segment elevation. There were no differences in right‐heart catheterization for patients with HF or in left heart catheterization for patients with AMI. In‐hospital mortality increased for AMI during COVID‐19 (odds ratio [OR], 1.46; 95% CI, 1.21–1.76), particularly among the ST‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction subgroup (OR, 2.57; 95% CI, 2.24–2.96), but was unchanged for HF (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.89–1.16). Conclusions Cardiovascular volume decreased during COVID‐19. Despite similar patient age and comorbidities and in‐hospital treatments during COVID‐19, mortality increased for patients with AMI but not patients with HF. Given that AMI is a time‐sensitive condition, delay or deferral of care rather than changes in hospital care delivery may have led to worse cardiovascular outcomes during COVID‐19.

No abstract

Program (HACRP) is a value-based payment program focused on safety events. Prior studies have found that the program disproportionately penalizes safety-net hospitals, which may perform more poorly because of unmeasured severity of illness rather than lower quality. A similar program, the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program, stratifies hospitals into 5 peer groups for evaluation based on the proportion of their patients dually enrolled in Medicare and Medicaid, but the effect of stratification on the HACRP is unknown.OBJECTIVE To characterize the hospitals penalized by the HACRP and the distribution of financial penalties before and after stratification. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSThis economic evaluation used publicly available data on HACRP performance and penalties merged with hospital characteristics and cost reports. A total of 3102 hospitals participating in the HACRP in fiscal year 2020 (covering data from July 1, 2016, to December 31, 2018) were studied.EXPOSURES Hospitals were divided into 5 groups based on the proportion of patients dually enrolled, and penalties were assigned to the lowest-performing quartile of hospitals in each group rather than the lowest-performing quartile overall. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESPenalties in the prestratification vs poststratification schemes. RESULTSThe study identified 3102 hospitals evaluated by the HACRP. Safety-net hospitals received $111 333 384 in penalties before stratification compared with an estimated $79 087 744 after stratification-a savings of $32 245 640. Hospitals less likely to receive penalties after stratification included safety-net hospitals (33.6% penalized before stratification vs 24.8% after stratification, Δ = -8.8 percentage points [pp], P < .001), public hospitals (34.1% vs 30.5%, Δ = -3.6 pp, P = .003), hospitals in the West (26.8% vs 23.2%, Δ = -3.6 pp, P < .001), hospitals in Medicaid expansion states (27.3% vs 25.6%, Δ = -1.7 pp, P = .003), and hospitals caring for the most patients with disabilities (32.2% vs 28.3%, Δ = -3.9 pp, P < .001) and from racial/ethnic minority backgrounds (35.1% vs 31.5%, Δ = -3.6 pp, P < .001). In multivariate analyses, safety-net status and treating patients with highly medically complex conditions were associated with higher odds of moving from penalized to nonpenalized status. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEThis economic evaluation suggests that stratification of hospitals would be associated with a narrowing of disparities in penalties and a marked reduction in penalties for safety-net hospitals. Policy makers should consider adopting stratification for the HACRP.