Dataset Information

Cost implications of improving blood pressure management among U.S. adults.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To examine the cost-effectiveness of improving blood pressure management from the payer perspective.

Data source/study setting

Medical record data for 4,500 U.S. adults with hypertension from the Community Quality Index (CQI) study (1996-2002), pharmaceutical claims from four Massachusetts health plans (2004-2006), Medicare fee schedule (2009), and published literature.

Study design

A probability tree depicted blood pressure management over 2 years.

Data collection/extraction methods

We determined how frequently CQI study subjects received recommended care processes and attained accepted treatment goals, estimated utilization of visits and medications associated with recommended care, assigned costs based on utilization, and then modeled how hospitalization rates, costs, and goal attainment would change if all recommended care was provided.

Principal findings

Relative to current care, improved care would cost payers U.S.$170 more per hypertensive person annually (2009 dollars). The incremental cost per person newly attaining treatment goals over 2 years would be U.S.$1,696 overall, U.S.$801 for moderate hypertension, and U.S.$850 for severe hypertension. Among people with severe hypertension, blood pressure would decline substantially but seldom reach goal; the incremental cost per person attaining a relaxed goal (? stage 1) would be U.S.$185.

Conclusions

Under the Health Care Effectiveness Data and Information Set program, which monitors the attainment of blood pressure treatment goals, payers will find it slightly more cost-effective to improve care for moderate than severe hypertension. Having a secondary, relaxed goal would substantially increase payers' incentive to improve care for severe hypertension.

SUBMITTER: Nuckols TK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3165181 | biostudies-literature | 2011 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Cost implications of improving blood pressure management among U.S. adults.

Nuckols Teryl K TK Aledort Julia E JE Adams John J Lai Julie J Go Myong-Hyun MH Keesey Joan J McGlynn Elizabeth E

Health services research 20110209 4

<h4>Objective</h4>To examine the cost-effectiveness of improving blood pressure management from the payer perspective.<h4>Data source/study setting</h4>Medical record data for 4,500 U.S. adults with hypertension from the Community Quality Index (CQI) study (1996-2002), pharmaceutical claims from four Massachusetts health plans (2004-2006), Medicare fee schedule (2009), and published literature.<h4>Study design</h4>A probability tree depicted blood pressure management over 2 years.<h4>Data collec ...[more]

PMID: 21306365

Similar Datasets

Project description:Importance:Among high-risk patients with hypertension, targeting a systolic blood pressure of 120 mm Hg reduces cardiovascular morbidity and mortality compared with a higher target. However, intensive blood pressure management incurs additional costs from treatment and from adverse events. Objective:To evaluate the incremental cost-effectiveness of intensive blood pressure management compared with standard management. Design, Setting, and Participants:This cost-effectiveness analysis conducted from September 2015 to August 2016 used a Markov cohort model to estimate cost-effectiveness of intensive blood pressure management among 68-year-old high-risk adults with hypertension but not diabetes. We used the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) to estimate treatment effects and adverse event rates. We used Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Life Tables to project age- and cause-specific mortality, calibrated to rates reported in SPRINT. We also used population-based observational data to model development of heart failure, myocardial infarction, stroke, and subsequent mortality. Costs were based on published sources, Medicare data, and the National Inpatient Sample. Interventions:Treatment of hypertension to a systolic blood pressure goal of 120 mm Hg (intensive management) or 140 mm Hg (standard management). Main Outcomes and Measures:Lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), discounted at 3% annually. Results:Standard management yielded 9.6 QALYs and accrued $155?261 in lifetime costs, while intensive management yielded 10.5 QALYs and accrued $176?584 in costs. Intensive blood pressure management cost $23?777 per QALY gained. In a sensitivity analysis, serious adverse events would need to occur at 3 times the rate observed in SPRINT and be 3 times more common in the intensive management arm to prefer standard management. Conclusions and Relevance:Intensive blood pressure management is cost-effective at typical thresholds for value in health care and remains so even with substantially higher adverse event rates.

Project description:BackgroundScientists and regulators have sought to understand whether and how physiologic dysregulation due to chronic stress exposure may enhance vulnerability to the adverse health effects of toxicant exposures. We conducted a cross-sectional study to determine whether allostatic load (AL), a composite measure of physiologic response to chronic exposure to stress, amplifies the effect of lead exposure on blood pressure among middle-aged adults.MethodsWe analyzed associations between blood lead levels and blood pressure in a nationally representative sample of 8,194 U.S. adults (aged 40-65 years) participating in the National Health and Nutritional Examination Survey, 1999--2008. Outcomes were elevated systolic (≥ 140 mm Hg) and diastolic (≥ 90 mm Hg) blood pressure. AL was defined as the aggregate score of seven components, reflecting dysregulation of the cardiovascular, inflammatory, and endocrine systems.ResultsLogistic regression models showed a linear dose-response relationship for quintiles of blood lead and elevated systolic blood pressure in the high AL group (p = 0.03) but not the low AL group (p = 0.24). Similarly, the relationship between lead exposure and elevated diastolic blood pressure was stronger among the high AL group than the low AL group. Within the high AL group, the fourth and fifth quintiles had significantly elevated odds of elevated blood pressure compared to lowest quintile [OR = 1.92, (95% CI, 1.07, 3.47) and OR =2.28 (95% CI, 1.33, 3.91), respectively]. In the low AL group, none of the quintile effects were significantly different than the referent group although there was evidence of a linear trend (p =0.03). The lead by AL interaction term was not statistically significant for either systolic or diastolic blood pressure models.ConclusionsResults suggest that higher AL may amplify the adverse effects of lead on blood pressure. Future research should assess the implications of cumulative exposures to environmental and social stressors for regulatory decision-making.

Dataset Information

Cost implications of improving blood pressure management among U.S. adults.

Objective

Data source/study setting

Study design

Data collection/extraction methods

Principal findings

Conclusions

Publications

Cost implications of improving blood pressure management among U.S. adults.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets