Search

This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of blood pressure (BP) screening strategies, including 1) home blood pressure measurement (HBPM), (2) serial screening by CBPM followed by HBPM among individuals with high BP i.e., clinic BP ≥140/90 mmHg (Serial1), (3) serial screening by CBPM followed by HBPM among individuals without high BP i.e., clinic blood pressure <140/90 mmHg (Serial2) compared to CBPM alone. A Markov model was applied among Thai population aged 35 years who had not been previously diagnosed with hypertension (HT) during a lifetime horizon with one-year cycle length from a societal perspective. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses using Monte Carlo simulation with 1,000 replications were performed. The total cost of Serial2 (118,283 baht) was the highest and followed by HBPM (110,767 baht), CBPM (110,588 baht) and Serial1 (78,310 baht). The total quality adjusted life years (QALYs) for the population undergoing BP screening with CBPM, HBPM, Serial1, and Serial2 were 22.1557, 22.1511, 22.1286, and 22.1564, respectively. Compared to CBPM, Serial1 was associated with an incremental cost saving of 32,278 and an incremental QALY loss of 0.0271, whereas HBPM was dominated by CBPM due to higher cost (179 baht) and fewer QALY (-0.0046). Additionally, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of Serial2 was the highest (10,992,000 baht per QALY gained). Moreover, the incidence rate of HT among individuals at age 40-49 years was the most sensitive factor influencing the ICER of HBPM, Serial1 and Serial2. At the Thai societal willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of 160,000 baht per QALY gained, the cost saving associated with Serial1 outweighed the QALY loss. Therefore, it is recommended that Serial1 be implemented as a BP screening option in Thailand. This evidence informed policy information could be invaluable for policymakers in making decision regarding BP screening through village health volunteer mechanism in Thailand and similar settings., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2024 Karnjanapiboonwong et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Background: Recognizing the importance of close follow-up after hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, many centers have initiated programs to support postpartum remote blood pressure management., Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of remote blood pressure management to determine the scalability of these programmatic interventions., Study Design: This was a cost-effectiveness analysis of using remote blood pressure management vs usual care to manage postpartum hypertension. The modeled remote blood pressure management included provision of a home blood pressure monitor, guidance on warning symptoms, instructions on blood pressure self-monitoring twice daily, and clinical staff to manage population-level blood pressures as appropriate. Usual care was defined as guidance on warning symptoms and recommendations for 1 outpatient visit for blood pressure monitoring within a week after discharge. This study designed a Markov model that ran over fourteen 1-day cycles to reflect the initial 2 weeks after delivery when most emergency department visits and readmissions occur and remote blood pressure management is clinically anticipated to be most impactful. Parameter values for the base-case scenario were derived from both internal data and literature review. Quality-adjusted life-years were calculated over the first year after delivery and reflected the short-term morbidities associated with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy that, for most birthing people, resolve by 2 weeks after delivery. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the strength and validity of the model. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, which was defined as the cost needed to gain 1 quality-adjusted life-year. The secondary outcome was incremental cost per readmission averted. Analyses were performed from a societal perspective., Results: In the base-case scenario, remote blood pressure management was the dominant strategy (ie, cost less, higher quality-adjusted life-years). In univariate sensitivity analyses, the most cost-effective strategy shifted to usual care when the cost of readmission fell below $2987.92 and the rate of reported severe range blood pressure with a response in remote blood pressure management was <1%. Assuming a willingness to pay of $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year, using remote blood pressure management was cost-effective in 99.28% of simulations in a Monte Carlo analysis. Using readmissions averted as a secondary effectiveness outcome, the incremental cost per readmission averted was $145.00., Conclusion: Remote blood pressure management for postpartum hypertension is cost saving and has better outcomes than usual care. Our data can be used to inform future dissemination of and support funding for remote blood pressure management programs., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To perform a cost analysis of the use of a new care pathway with a digital health platform for blood pressure telemonitoring for women at risk of preeclampsia., Study Design: This is a cost analysis of a case-control study with women with chronic hypertension, history of preeclampsia, maternal cardiac or kidney disease at intake of pregnancy. Antenatal care with a reduced visit schedule and a digital health platform (SAFE@HOME, n = 97) was compared to a retrospective control group (n = 133) with usual care without self-monitoring., Main Outcome Measures: Costs per pregnancy (€) of healthcare consumption of antenatal clinic visits, ultrasound assessments, antenatal admissions, laboratory and other diagnostic tests, and societal costs such as traveling and work absence., Results: Baseline characteristics and perinatal outcomes were similar between both groups. A significant reduction of antenatal visits, ultrasounds and hypertension-related admissions was associated with use of the digital platform. In the SAFE@HOME group, costs of antenatal care, including the costs of the digital platform, were 19.7% lower compared to the control group (median €3616 [IQR 3071 - 5329] vs €4504 [IQR 3515-6923], p = 0.001). Total costs per pregnancy, including societal costs, were also reduced (€7485 [IQR 6338-10,173] vs €9150, [IQR 7546-12,286] p < 0.001). Each euro invested in the platform saved on average €8 of antenatal care resources., Conclusion: The use of a digital platform for blood pressure and symptom monitoring in antenatal care for high-risk women is associated with lower costs compared to conventional care, while observed maternal and neonatal outcomes are similar., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Hypertension is one of the largest contributors to the disease burden and a major economic challenge for health-care systems. Early detection of persons with high blood pressure can be achieved through screening and has the potential to reduce morbidity and mortality. We evaluate the cost-effectiveness of an opportunistic hypertension screening programme in a dental-care facility for individuals aged 40-75 in comparison to care as usual (the no-screening baseline scenario)., Methods: A cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) was carried out from the payer and societal perspectives, and the short-term (from screening until diagnosis has been established) cost per identified case of hypertension and long-term (20 years) cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) were reported. Data on the short-term cost were based on a real-world screening programme in which 2025 healthy individuals were screened for hypertension. Data on the long-term cost were based on the short-term outcomes combined with modelling in a Markov cohort model. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were carried out to assess uncertainty., Results: The short-term analysis showed an additional cost of 4,800 SEK (€470) per identified case of hypertension from the payer perspective and from the societal perspective 12,800 SEK (€1,240). The long-term analysis showed a payer cost per QALY of 2.2 million SEK (€210,000) and from the societal perspective 2.8 million SEK per QALY (€270,000)., Conclusion: The long-term model results showed that the screening model is unlikely to be cost-effective in a country with a well-developed health-care system and a relatively low prevalence of hypertension., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Background: Clinical guidelines increasingly recommended ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) for hypertension diagnosis and management. Yet, ABPM is used infrequently in the United States, possibly because of low insurance coverage and high patient costs. We sought to analyze out-of-pocket payments (OPPs) for ABPM among privately insured patients., Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis using IBM® MarketScan® commercial claims of beneficiaries aged ≥18 years receiving ABPM from January 2012 to December 2018. The date of first ABPM claim (Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System codes 93784, 93786, 93788, or 93790) was considered the index date. Patients with 12 months of continuous enrollment preindex and 30-day postindex were included. Per beneficiary OPP was calculated by aggregating all ABPM-related OPPs within the 30-day postindex window (ABPM episode)., Results: Of 22,317 beneficiaries receiving ABPM, 62% had $0 OPP and 38% had OPP >$0. Among the latter, median OPP per beneficiary for an ABPM episode was $23 (interquartile range [IQR], $14, $32), driven primarily by full ABPM claims (median, $22; IQR, $14, $24). Among individual components, scan analysis and report claims (median, $25; IQR, $13, $49) had the greatest OPP. The median OPP per ABPM episode did not change substantively from 2012 through 2018., Conclusions: Among commercially insured in the United States, nearly 4-in-10 have an OPP for ABPM. Though most OPPs are relatively modest, some patients incur substantial OPP. Our findings highlight the need for policymakers to ensure adequate ABPM coverage in the commercial insurance marketplace., (© American Journal of Hypertension, Ltd 2020. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Uncontrolled hypertension is a leading contributor to cardiovascular disease. A cluster-randomized trial in 16 primary care clinics showed that 12 months of home blood pressure telemonitoring and pharmacist management lowered blood pressure more than usual care (UC) for 24 months. We report cardiovascular events (nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, hospitalized heart failure, coronary revascularization, and cardiovascular death) and costs over 5 years of follow-up. In the telemonitoring intervention (TI group, n=228), there were 15 cardiovascular events (5 myocardial infarction, 4 stroke, 5 heart failure, 1 cardiovascular death) among 10 patients. In UC group (n=222), there were 26 events (11 myocardial infarction, 12 stroke, 3 heart failure) among 19 patients. The cardiovascular composite end point incidence was 4.4% in the TI group versus 8.6% in the UC group (odds ratio, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.21-1.13], P =0.09). Including 2 coronary revascularizations in the TI group and 10 in the UC group, the secondary cardiovascular composite end point incidence was 5.3% in the TI group versus 10.4% in the UC group (odds ratio, 0.48 [95% CI, 0.22-1.08], P =0.08). Microsimulation modeling showed the difference in events far exceeded predictions based on observed blood pressure. Intervention costs (in 2017 US dollars) were $1511 per patient. Over 5 years, estimated event costs were $758 000 in the TI group and $1 538 000 in the UC group for a return on investment of 126% and a net cost savings of about $1900 per patient. Telemonitoring with pharmacist management lowered blood pressure and may have reduced costs by avoiding cardiovascular events over 5 years. Registration- URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT00781365.

Introduction: Heart failure (HF) leads to significant morbidity and mortality and imposes a large economic burden. Although there have been several advances in HF monitoring and management, HF-rehospitalization remains a significant problem. Remote monitoring of HF to detect early signs of decompensation has emerged in past years as an option to prevent or reduce the incidence of HF rehospitalization. The CardioMEMS TM HF system is a wireless pulmonary artery (PA) pressure monitoring system that detects changes in PA pressure and transmits data to the healthcare provider. Since changes in PA pressure happen early in the course of HF decompensation, the CardioMEMS TM system allows the provider to institute timely intensification of HF therapies to alter the course. In trial and registry data, the use of the CardioMEMS TM HF system has been associated with reduction in HF hospitalization, improvement in quality of life, symptoms, and physical activity., Areas Covered: This review will focus on the available data supporting its utilization in patients with HF., Expert Opinion: CardioMEMS TM is relatively safe and cost-effective, reduces heart failure hospitalization rates, and fits into intermediate to high-value medical care.

Use of 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring is strongly endorsed by contemporary hypertension guidelines. The objective of this study was to assess patient perceptions of ambulatory blood pressure testing, tolerability, accessibility, and expense. A convenience sample of 50, consenting patients undergoing ambulatory blood pressure monitoring at the University of Alberta Hypertension Clinic in Edmonton, Canada was studied. A 16-item structured questionnaire was administered in person or electronically. Questions regarding the tolerability of ambulatory monitoring were evaluated using a 5-point Likert scale and wait times, expenditures, and willingness to pay were evaluated by direct questioning. Mean age was 53.1 ± 15.4 years, 32 (64%) were female, and 23 (46%) were employed. Mean 24-hour ambulatory BP was 134 ± 12/79 ± 8 mmHg. Ambulatory monitoring caused discomfort in 40 (80%) patients and disturbed sleep in 39 (78%). Forty-one (82%) patients perceived that the home (vs pharmacy, primary care clinic, and speciality care clinic) would be the easiest venue to access future testing. On average, patients waited 27.3 ± 23.7 days for testing; they felt that a wait time of 21.3 ± 12.3 days was appropriate. Mean time taken off work was 8.6 ± 10.8 hours. Twelve (24%) patients indicated that they would be willing to pay out-of-pocket to undergo testing sooner, at a mean expenditure of $120 ± 69. Nineteen (62%) patients were willing to buy a monitor and felt that a mean purchase cost of $125 ± 89 was appropriate. These findings extend current knowledge of patient perceptions of ambulatory monitoring and may help to refine and optimize future delivery of this essential test., (© 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) is considered the best means of diagnosing hypertension. However, it is rarely used and is reimbursed only under narrow conditions. We sought to gain insight into the perceived value of ABPM among stakeholders who responded to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' (CMS) request for comments to inform the first revision of ABPM reimbursement policy in over 15 years. We found that most comments were classifiable in two main themes, current coverage and future coverage. Individuals and institutions representing multiple disciplines and specialties were highly supportive of expanding the current CMS coverage of ABPM, including for a wide range of clinical indications and populations. It is clear from the comments reviewed that there is wide support for expanding CMS coverage for ABPM. Broad support for a change in ABPM reimbursement policy may lead to changes in the way this technology is used in the United States., (© 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

The cost-effectiveness of ambulatory blood pressure (BP) monitoring (ABPM) versus traditional office BP measurement (OBPM) for the diagnosis and management of hypertension has been evaluated only by few studies and based solely on the reduction of medical care expenses through avoiding treatment of isolated-office hypertension. Data from the 21963 participants in the Hygia Project, a multicenter outcomes study that incorporates into routine primary care periodic, at least yearly, 48 h ABPM evaluation, were utilized to assess the cost-effectiveness - relative to vascular pathology expenditures countrywide in Spain - of ABPM versus OBPM. The actual reported Spanish healthcare expenditure for vascular pathology in 2015 - aggregate costs of medical examinations, outpatient and inpatient care, therapeutic interventions, plus non-healthcare services (productivity losses due to morbidity/mortality and informal family/friends-provided care) - was used to compare yearly costs when diagnostic and treatment decisions for hypertension are based on the OBPM versus the ABPM-model. Our economic analysis is based on the more realistic and feasible approach of restricting ABPM solely to high-risk individuals of age ≥60 years and/or with diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and/or previous cardiovascular event, who in the Hygia Project accounted for >90% of all documented events. The projected net benefit countrywide in favor of the proposed ABPM-model is ~5294M€/year, i.e., 360.33€/year (95%CI [347.52-374.85]) per ABPM-evaluated person. This highly conservative economic analysis indicates ABPM is a much more cost-effective strategy than repeated OBPM not only for accurate diagnosis and management of true hypertension but marked reduction of expenditures on elevated BP-associated vascular pathology.

Introduction: Pregnant women faced with complications of pregnancy often require long-term hospital admission for maternal and/or fetal monitoring. Antenatal admissions cause a burden to patients as well as hospital resources and costs. A telemonitoring platform connected to wireless cardiotocography (CTG) and automated blood pressure (BP) devices can be used for telemonitoring in pregnancy. Home telemonitoring might improve autonomy and reduce admissions and thus costs. The aim of this study is to compare the effects on patient safety, satisfaction and cost-effectiveness of ho spital care versus tel emonitoring (HOTEL) as an obstetric care strategy in high-risk pregnancies requiring daily monitoring., Methods and Analysis: The HOTEL trial is an ongoing multicentre randomised controlled clinical trial with a non-inferiority design. Eligible pregnant women are >26+0 weeks of singleton gestation requiring monitoring because of pre-eclampsia (hypertension with proteinuria), fetal growth restriction, preterm rupture of membranes without contractions, recurrent reduced fetal movements or an intrauterine fetal death in a previous pregnancy.Randomisation takes place between traditional hospitalisation (planned n=208) versus telemonitoring (planned n=208) until delivery. Telemonitoring at home is facilitated with Sense4Baby CTG devices, Microlife BP monitor and daily telephone calls with an obstetric healthcare professional as well as weekly hospital visits.Primary outcome is a composite of adverse perinatal outcome, defined as perinatal mortality, 5 min Apgar <7 or arterial cord blood pH <7.05, maternal morbidity (eclampsia, HELLP (hemolysis, elevated liver enzymes, and low platelets) syndrome, thromboembolic event), neonatal intensive care admission and caesarean section rate. Patient satisfaction and preference of care will be assessed using validated questionnaires. We will perform an economic analysis. Outcomes will be analysed according to the intention to treat principle., Ethics and Dissemination: The study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Utrecht University Medical Center and the boards of all six participating centres. Trial results will be submitted to peer-reviewed journals., Trial Registration Number: NTR6076., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: Traditional blood-pressure monitoring in hypertensive pregnant women requires frequent visits to the maternity outpatient services. Home blood-pressure monitoring (HBPM) could offer a cost-saving alternative that is acceptable to patients. The aim of this study was to undertake a health economic analysis of HBPM compared with traditional monitoring in hypertensive pregnant women., Methods: This was a cost-minimization study of hypertensive pregnant women who had HBPM with or without the adjunct of a smartphone application (App), via a specially designed pathway, and a control group managed according to the local protocol of regular hospital visits for blood-pressure monitoring. Outcome measures were the number of outpatient visits, inpatient bed stays and investigations performed. Maternal, fetal and neonatal adverse outcomes were also recorded. Health economic analysis was performed using direct cost comparison of the study dataset and process scenario modeling., Results: The HBPM group included 108 women, of whom 29 recorded their results on the smartphone App and 79 in their notes. The control group comprised 58 patients. There were significantly more women with chronic hypertension in the HBPM group than in the control group (49.1% vs 25.9%, P = 0.004). The HBPM group had significantly longer duration of monitoring (9 weeks vs 5 weeks, P = 0.004) and started monitoring at an earlier gestational age (30.0 weeks vs 33.6 weeks, P = 0.001) compared with the control group. Despite these differences, the mean saving per week for each patient using HBPM compared with traditional monitoring was £200.69, while for each HBPM patient using the smartphone App, the weekly saving was £286.53 compared with the control group. The process modeling method predicted weekly savings of between £98.32 and £245.80 per patient using HBPM compared with traditional monitoring., Conclusion: HBPM in hypertensive pregnancy appears to be cost saving compared with traditional monitoring, without compromising maternal, fetal or neonatal safety. Larger studies are required to confirm these findings. Copyright © 2018 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd., (Copyright © 2018 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Previous cost-effectiveness models found ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) to be a favorable strategy to diagnose hypertension; however, they mostly focused on older adults with a positive clinic blood pressure (BP) screen. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of 3 methods of BP measurement for hypertension diagnosis in primary care settings among 14 age- and sex-stratified hypothetical cohorts (adults ≥21 years of age), accounting for the possibility of both false-positive (white-coat hypertension) and false-negative (masked hypertension) clinic measurements. We compared quality-adjusted life-years and lifetime costs ($US 2017 from the US healthcare perspective) associated with clinic BP measurement, home BP monitoring, and ABPM under 2 scenarios: positive and negative initial screen. Model parameters were obtained from published literature, publicly available data sources, and expert input. In the screen-positive scenario, ABPM was the dominant strategy among all age and sex groups. Compared with clinic BP measurement, ABPM was associated with cost-savings ranging from $77 (women 80 years of age) to $5013 (women 21 years of age). In the screen-negative scenario, ABPM was the dominant strategy in all men and women <80 years of age with cost-savings ranging from $128 (women 70 years of age) to $2794 (women 21 years of age). Sensitivity analyses showed that results were sensitive to test specificity and antihypertensive medication costs. ABPM is recommended as the diagnostic strategy of choice for most adults in primary care settings regardless of initial screening results.

Objective: To assess the agreement between home blood-pressure monitoring (HBPM) and blood-pressure measurements in a clinic setting, in a cohort of pregnant women with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP)., Methods: This was a cohort study of 147 pregnant women with HDP conducted at St George's Hospital, University of London, London, UK, between 2016 and 2017. Inclusion criteria were chronic hypertension, gestational hypertension or high risk of developing pre-eclampsia, no significant proteinuria and no hematological or biochemical abnormalities. Each included patient was prescribed a personalized schedule of hospital visits and blood-pressure measurements, according to their individual risk as per UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines. The blood-pressure measurement at the clinic and the HBPM reading obtained closest to that hospital visit were paired for analysis. Only one pair of measurements was used per patient. Differences between home and clinic blood-pressure measurements were tested using the Wilcoxon signed rank test or paired t-test, and were also assessed visually using Bland-Altman plots. Comparison of the binary outcomes was performed using McNemar's chi-square test. Subgroup analysis was performed in the following gestational-age windows: < 14 weeks, 15-22 weeks, 23-32 weeks and 33-42 weeks' gestation., Results: A total of 294 blood-pressure measurements from 147 women were included in the analysis. Median systolic HBPM measurements were significantly lower than clinic measurements (132.0 (interquartile range (IQR), 123.0-140.0) mmHg vs 138.0 (IQR, 132.0-146.5) mmHg; P < 0.001). When stratified according to gestational age, systolic blood-pressure measurements obtained at home were significantly lower than those at clinic in all gestational-age periods except 23-32 weeks' gestation (P = 0.057). Median diastolic blood-pressure measurements at home were also significantly lower than those at clinic (85.0 (IQR, 77.0-90.0) mmHg vs 89.0 (IQR, 82.0-94.0) mmHg; P < 0.001). When stratified according to gestational age, diastolic HBPM measurements were significantly lower in the periods 5-14 weeks (P < 0.001), 15-22 weeks (P = 0.008) and 33-42 weeks (P < 0.001), compared with clinic measurements. The incidence of clinically significant systolic and diastolic hypertension based on clinic blood-pressure measurements was four to five times higher than that based on HBPM measurements (P < 0.001 and P = 0.005, respectively)., Conclusions: Our study shows that, in women with HDP, blood pressure measured at home is lower than that measured in a clinic setting. This is consistent with observations in non-pregnant adults, in whom home and ambulatory monitoring of hypertensive patients is recommended. As such, HBPM has the potential to reduce the number of false-positive diagnoses of severe hypertension and unnecessary medical interventions in women with HDP. This must be carefully weighed against the risk of missing true-positive diagnoses. Prospective studies investigating the use of HBPM in pregnant women are urgently needed to determine the relevant blood-pressure thresholds for HBPM, and interval and frequency of monitoring. Copyright © 2018 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd., (Copyright © 2018 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Guidelines recommend that patients with newly elevated office blood pressure undergo ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) or home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM) to rule-out white coat hypertension before being diagnosed with hypertension. We explored patients' perspectives of the barriers and facilitators to undergoing ABPM or HBPM., Methods: Focus groups were conducted with twenty English- and Spanish-speaking individuals from underserved communities in New York City. Two researchers analyzed transcripts using a conventional content analysis to identify barriers and facilitators to participation in ABPM and HBPM., Results: Participants described favorable attitudes toward testing including readily understanding white coat hypertension, agreeing with the rationale for out-of-office testing, and believing that testing would benefit patients. Regarding ABPM, participants expressed concerns over the representativeness of the day the test was performed and the intrusiveness of the frequent readings. Regarding HBPM, participants expressed concerns over the validity of the monitoring method and the reliability of home blood pressure devices. For both tests, participants noted that out-of-pocket costs may deter patient participation and felt that patients would require detailed information about the test itself before deciding to participate. Participants overwhelmingly believed that out-of-office testing benefits outweighed testing barriers, were confident that they could successfully complete either testing if recommended by their provider, and described the rationale for their testing preference., Conclusions: Participants identified dominant barriers and facilitators to ABPM and HBPM testing, articulated testing preferences, and believed that they could successfully complete out-of-office testing if recommended by their provider.

Home blood pressure monitoring provides multiple measurements in the usual environment of each individual, allows the detection of intermediate hypertension phenotypes (white-coat and masked hypertension), and appears to have superior prognostic value compared to the conventional office blood pressure measurements. Accumulating evidence suggests that home blood pressure monitoring improves long-term hypertension control rates. Moreover, it is widely available, relatively inexpensive, and well accepted by patients. Thus, current guidelines recommend home blood pressure monitoring as an essential method for the evaluation of almost all untreated and treated patients with suspected or treated hypertension. Validated automated upper-arm cuff devices with automated storage and averaging of readings should be used. The home blood pressure monitoring schedule for 4 to 7 days with exclusion of the first day (12-24 readings) should be averaged to provide values for decision making., (©2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Objective: To examine the degree of knowledge and management of automated devices for office blood pressure measurement (AD), home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM) and ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) in primary care in Spain., Methods: Online self-administered survey sent between May 2016 and February 2017 to 2221 primary-care physicians working across Spain. Clinicians were mostly identified through national primary-care scientific societies (20% overall response rate)., Results: Participants' mean age was 47.7 years, 55% were women, and 54% reported at least 20 years of primary-care practice. Among them, 47.5% considered ABPM the best diagnostic method for hypertension, 23% chose HBPM, and 7.1% chose office blood pressure. Also, 78.2% had AD available at their centers and 49.0% had ABPM, with slight urban/rural differences. HBPM was recommended in daily practice for hypertension diagnosis by 67% of participants, whereas 30% recommended ABPM. Cost to the patients was the main reason for not using HBPM (42.7%) as was lack of accessibility for not using ABPM (69.8%). Lack of specific training was also reported as an important reason in both cases., Conclusion: Even in the possibly best primary care scenario presented by highly motivated physicians (respondents to a voluntary anonymous survey), enormous gaps were observed between current guidelines' recommendations on ABPM and HBPM use for confirming hypertension and the modest degree of knowledge, availability, and use of these technologies.

Background: Noninvasive continuous blood pressure (BP) measurement has become an evolving topic in the field of remote healthcare. The classical noninvasive BP measurement techniques provide spontaneous values of systolic and diastolic BP. On the other hand, intrusive type BP measurement techniques provide continuous values of systolic and diastolic BP. However, these techniques are very painful, cannot be used for long-term monitoring, and are obtainable only in an intensive care unit environment. With the advancement of the remote healthcare industry, there is a growing demand for noninvasive continuous BP monitoring., Objective: The objective of this research was to present a compact literature review on the various prospective approaches of noninvasive continuous BP measurement techniques., Materials & Methods: The most contemporary and advanced technologies on noninvasive continuous BP measurement are Tactile Sensing, Vascular Unloading Technique, Pulse Transit Time, Photoplethysmography, Ultrasound-based BP measurement, BP measurement from image processing, etc. The literature search based on these technologies was conducted in EMBASE, Web of Science, IEEE, PubMed, and Ovid MEDLINE databases. In this study, each selected approach was evaluated and characterized using the following criteria: (1) accuracy; (2) cost; (3) portability; (4) comfort and convenience of use; (5) clinical health and safety; and (6) ability to integrate with the remote healthcare system., Results: A detailed technical analysis was done to determine the advantages and limitations of each technique in the context of the abovementioned parameters. It was observed that BP measurement, using photoplethysmography (using camera or sensor or both), perhaps was the most promising technique among all., Conclusion: The study emphasized the fact that the noninvasive, continuous BP measurement technique needs to evolve further to make it reliable, accurate, and user-friendly. Lastly, a possible direction toward a more reliable and comfortable noninvasive continuous BP measurement technique has been discussed.

Clinical guidelines in the United States and United Kingdom recommend that individuals with suspected hypertension should have ambulatory blood pressure (BP) monitoring to confirm the diagnosis. This approach reduces misdiagnosis because of white coat hypertension but will not identify people with masked hypertension who may benefit from treatment. The Predicting Out-of-Office Blood Pressure (PROOF-BP) algorithm predicts masked and white coat hypertension based on patient characteristics and clinic BP, improving the accuracy of diagnosis while limiting subsequent ambulatory BP monitoring. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of using this tool in diagnosing hypertension in primary care. A Markov cost-utility cohort model was developed to compare diagnostic strategies: the PROOF-BP approach, including those with clinic BP ≥130/80 mm Hg who receive ambulatory BP monitoring as guided by the algorithm, compared with current standard diagnostic strategies including those with clinic BP ≥140/90 mm Hg combined with further monitoring (ambulatory BP monitoring as reference, clinic, and home monitoring also assessed). The model adopted a lifetime horizon with a 3-month time cycle, taking a UK Health Service/Personal Social Services perspective. The PROOF-BP algorithm was cost-effective in screening all patients with clinic BP ≥130/80 mm Hg compared with current strategies that only screen those with clinic BP ≥140/90 mm Hg, provided healthcare providers were willing to pay up to £20 000 ($26 000)/quality-adjusted life year gained. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses supported the base-case findings. The PROOF-BP algorithm seems to be cost-effective compared with the conventional BP diagnostic options in primary care. Its use in clinical practice is likely to lead to reduced cardiovascular disease, death, and disability., (© 2017 American Heart Association, Inc.)

Context: Effective community-based interventions are available to control hypertension. It is important to determine the economics of these interventions., Evidence Acquisition: Peer-reviewed studies from January 1995 through December 2015 were screened. Interventions were categorized into educational interventions, self-monitoring interventions, and screening interventions. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were summarized by types of interventions. The review was conducted in 2016., Evidence Synthesis: Thirty-four articles were included in the review (16 from the U.S., 18 from other countries), including 25 on educational interventions, three on self-monitoring interventions, and six on screening interventions. In the U.S., five (31.3%) studies on educational interventions were cost saving. Among the studies that found the interventions cost effective, the median incremental costs were $62 (range, $40-$114) for 1-mmHg reduction in systolic blood pressure (SBP) and $13,986 (range, $6,683-$58,610) for 1 life-year gained. Outside the U.S., educational interventions cost from $0.62 (China) to $29 (Pakistan) for 1-mmHg reduction in SBP. Self-monitoring interventions, evaluated in the U.S. only, cost $727 for 1-mmHg reduction in SBP and $41,927 for 1 life-year gained. For 1 quality-adjusted life-year, screening interventions cost from $21,734 to $56,750 in the U.S., $613 to $5,637 in Australia, and $7,000 to $18,000 in China. Intervention costs to reduce 1 mmHg blood pressure or 1 quality-adjusted life-year were higher in the U.S. than in other countries., Conclusions: Most studies found that the three types of interventions were either cost effective or cost saving. Quality of economic studies should be improved to confirm the findings., (Copyright © 2017 American Journal of Preventive Medicine. All rights reserved.)

The Community Preventive Services Task Force recommended five interventions for cardiovascular disease prevention between 2012 and 2015. Systematic economic reviews of these interventions faced challenges that made it difficult to generate meaningful policy and programmatic conclusions. This paper describes the methods used to assess, synthesize, and evaluate the economic evidence to generate reliable and useful economic conclusions and address the comparability of economic findings across interventions. Specifically, steps were taken to assess completeness of data and identify the components and drivers of cost and benefit. Except for the intervention cost of self-measured blood pressure monitoring intervention, either alone or with patient support, all cost and benefit estimates were standardized as per patient per year. When possible, intermediate outcomes were converted to quality-adjusted life year. Differences within and between interventions were considered to generate economic conclusions and inform their comparability. The literature search period varied among interventions. This analysis was completed in 2016. Although team-based care, self-measured blood pressure monitoring with patient support, and self-measured blood pressure monitoring within team-based care were found to be cost effective, their cost-effectiveness estimates were not comparable because of differences in the intervention characteristics. Lack of enough data or incomplete information made it difficult to reach an overall economic finding for the other interventions. The Community Guide methods discussed here may help others conducting systematic economic reviews of public health interventions to respond to challenges with the synthesis of evidence and provide useful findings for public health decision makers., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Context: The health and economic burden of hypertension, a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease, is substantial. This systematic review evaluated the economic evidence of self-measured blood pressure (SMBP) monitoring interventions to control hypertension., Evidence Acquisition: The literature search from database inception to March 2015 identified 22 studies for inclusion with three types of interventions: SMBP used alone, SMBP with additional support, and SMBP within team-based care (TBC). Two formulae were used to convert reductions in systolic BP (SBP) to quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) to produce cost per QALY saved. All analyses were conducted in 2015, with estimates adjusted to 2014 U.S. dollars., Evidence Synthesis: Median costs of intervention were $60 and $174 per person for SMBP alone and SMBP with additional support, respectively, and $732 per person per year for SMBP within TBC. SMBP alone and SMBP with additional support reduced healthcare cost per person per year from outpatient visits and medication (medians $148 and $3, respectively; median follow-up, 12-13 months). SMBP within TBC exhibited an increase in healthcare cost (median, $369 per person per year; median follow-up, 18 months). SMBP alone varied from cost saving to a maximum cost of $144,000 per QALY saved, with two studies reporting an increase in SBP. The two translated median costs per QALY saved were $2,800 and $4,000 for SMBP with additional support and $7,500 and $10,800 for SMBP within TBC., Conclusions: SMBP monitoring interventions with additional support or within TBC are cost effective. Cost effectiveness of SMBP used alone could not be determined., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

In 2015, the US Preventive Services Task Force updated their hypertension recommendations to advise that adults with elevated office blood pressure (BP) undergo out-of-office BP measurement to exclude white coat hypertension before diagnosis. Our goal was to determine the most important barriers to primary care providers' ordering ambulatory and home BP monitoring in the United States. We enrolled 63 primary care providers into nominal group panels in which participants iteratively listed and ranked barriers to ambulatory and home BP monitoring. Top-ranked barriers to ambulatory BP monitoring were challenges in accessing testing, costs of testing, concerns about the willingness or ability of patients to successfully complete tests, and concerns about the accuracy and benefits of testing. Top-ranked barriers to home BP monitoring were concerns about compliance with the correct test protocol, accuracy of tests results, out-of-pocket costs of home BP devices, and time needed to instruct patients on home BP monitoring protocol. Efforts to increase the use of ambulatory and home BP monitoring by primary care providers in the United States should prioritize increasing the financial and personnel resources available for testing and addressing provider concerns about patients' ability to conduct high-quality tests., (Copyright © 2017 American Society of Hypertension. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction and Objectives: The prevalence of hypertension in Portugal is between 29.1% and 42.2%. International studies show that 13% of individuals have masked hypertension and 13% of diagnoses based on office blood pressure measurements are in fact white coat hypertension. More sensitive and specific blood pressure measuring methods could avoid costs associated with misdiagnosis. The aim of this study was to review the cost-effectiveness of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) compared to other methods in the management of hypertension., Methods: We performed a literature search in CMA Infobase, Guidelines Finder, National Guideline Clearinghouse, Bandolier, BMJ Clinical Evidence, the Cochrane Library, DARE, Medline, the Trip Database, SUMSearch and Índex das Revistas Médicas Portuguesas. We researched articles published between January 2005 and August 2015 in Portuguese, English and Spanish, using the MeSH terms "Hypertension", "Blood Pressure Monitoring, Ambulatory" and "Cost-Benefit Analysis" and the Portuguese search terms "Hipertensão", "Monitorização Ambulatorial da Pressão Arterial" and "Análise Custo-Benefício". Levels of evidence and grades of recommendation were attributed according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine scale., Results: Five hundred and twenty-five articles were identified. We included five original studies and one clinical practice guideline. All of them state that ABPM is the most cost-effective method. Two report better blood pressure control, and a Portuguese study revealed a saving of 23%., Conclusions: The evidence shows that ABPM is cost-effective, avoiding iatrogenic effects and reducing expenditure on treatment (grade of recommendation B). The included studies provide a solid basis, but further evidence of reproducibility is needed in research that is not based mainly on analytical models., (Copyright © 2016 Sociedade Portuguesa de Cardiologia. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Recently, a permanently implantable wireless system, designed to monitor and manage pulmonary artery (PA) pressures remotely, demonstrated significant reductions in heart failure (HF) hospitalizations in high-risk symptomatic patients, regardless of ejection fraction. The objectives of this study were to simulate the estimated clinical and economic impact in Germany of generalized use of this PA pressure monitoring system considering reductions of HF hospitalizations and the improvement in Quality of Life., Materials and Methods: Based on the Prospective Health Technology Assessment approach, we simulated the potential of the widespread application of PA pressure monitoring on the German healthcare system for the period 2009-2021., Results: This healthcare economic simulation formulated input assumptions based on results from the CHAMPION Trial, a multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled U.S. trial that demonstrated a 37% reduction of hospitalizations in persistently symptomatic previous HF patients. Based on these results, an estimated 114,800 hospitalizations would expected to be avoided. This effect would potentially save an estimated €522 million, an equivalent of $575 million, during the entire simulation period., Conclusion: This healthcare economic modeling of the PA pressure monitoring system's impact demonstrates substantial clinical and economic benefits in the German healthcare system.

Recently, the US Preventive Services Task Force issued a draft recommendation to utilize 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure (BP) monitoring (ABPM) to confirm the diagnosis of hypertension after screening. However, ABPM can be inconvenient and has some adverse effects such as pain and bruising from the repeated cuff inflations. In this national survey, we asked adults 30 years and older how much physical discomfort they would be willing to undergo to have the most accurate test available for evaluating possible high BP. We also asked how much they would be willing to pay to have the test. Among 1010 respondents, 95% of participants indicated willingness to undergo at least mild physical discomfort. The median amount people would be willing to pay was $25. These findings suggest that people are willing to undergo a bit of discomfort, and even pay a small amount, for the benefit of accurate BP assessment., (© 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the CardioMEMS (CardioMEMS Heart Failure System, St Jude Medical Inc, Atlanta, Georgia) device in patients with chronic heart failure., Background: The CardioMEMS device, an implantable pulmonary artery pressure monitor, was shown to reduce hospitalizations for heart failure and improve quality of life in the CHAMPION (CardioMEMS Heart Sensor Allows Monitoring of Pressure to Improve Outcomes in NYHA Class III Heart Failure Patients) trial., Methods: We developed a Markov model to determine the hospitalization, survival, quality of life, cost, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of CardioMEMS implantation compared with usual care among a CHAMPION trial cohort of patients with heart failure. We obtained event rates and utilities from published trial data; we used costs from literature estimates and Medicare reimbursement data. We performed subgroup analyses of preserved and reduced ejection fraction and an exploratory analysis in a lower-risk cohort on the basis of the CHARM (Candesartan in Heart failure: Reduction in Mortality and Morbidity) trials., Results: CardioMEMS reduced lifetime hospitalizations (2.18 vs. 3.12), increased quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) (2.74 vs. 2.46), and increased costs ($176,648 vs. $156,569), thus yielding a cost of $71,462 per QALY gained and $48,054 per life-year gained. The cost per QALY gained was $82,301 in patients with reduced ejection fraction and $47,768 in those with preserved ejection fraction. In the lower-risk CHARM cohort, the device would need to reduce hospitalizations for heart failure by 41% to cost <$100,000 per QALY gained. The cost-effectiveness was most sensitive to the device's durability., Conclusions: In populations similar to that of the CHAMPION trial, the CardioMEMS device is cost-effective if the trial effectiveness is sustained over long periods. Post-marketing surveillance data on durability will further clarify its value., (Copyright © 2016 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Black and Hispanic stroke survivors experience higher rates of recurrent stroke than whites. This disparity is partly explained by disproportionately higher rates of uncontrolled hypertension in these populations. Home blood pressure telemonitoring (HBPTM) and nurse case management (NCM) have proven efficacy in addressing the multilevel barriers to blood pressure (BP) control and reducing BP. However, the effectiveness of these interventions has not been evaluated in stroke patients. This study is designed to evaluate the comparative effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and sustainability of these two telehealth interventions in reducing BP and recurrent stroke among high-risk Black and Hispanic stroke survivors with uncontrolled hypertension., Methods/design: A total of 450 Black and Hispanic patients with recent nondisabling stroke and uncontrolled hypertension are randomly assigned to one of two 12-month interventions: 1) HBPTM with wireless feedback to primary care providers or 2) HBPTM plus individualized, culturally-tailored, telephone-based NCM. Patients are recruited from stroke centers and primary care practices within the Health and Hospital Corporations (HHC) Network in New York City. Study visits occur at baseline, 6, 12 and 24 months. The primary outcomes are within-patient change in systolic BP at 12 months, and the rate of stroke recurrence at 24 months. The secondary outcome is the comparative cost-effectiveness of the interventions at 12 and 24 months; and exploratory outcomes include changes in stroke risk factors, health behaviors and treatment intensification. Recruitment for the stroke telemonitoring hypertension trial is currently ongoing., Discussion: The combination of two established and effective interventions along with the utilization of health information technology supports the sustainability of the HBPTM + NCM intervention and feasibility of its widespread implementation. Results of this trial will provide strong empirical evidence to inform clinical guidelines for management of stroke in minority stroke survivors with uncontrolled hypertension. If effective among Black and Hispanic stroke survivors, these interventions have the potential to substantially mitigate racial and ethnic disparities in stroke recurrence., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02011685 . Registered 10 December 2013.

Objective(s): Twenty-four-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) seems to be the most accurate way of diagnosing hypertension in patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). However, this diagnostic tool is expensive and time-consuming and is therefore not used routinely. We aimed to find baseline predictors that enable the identification of patients who misclassify themselves as nonhypertensive to optimize the use of ABPM., Methods: Clinically suspected OSA patients (n=369) were enrolled and underwent overnight polysomnography and 24-h ABPM, and completed a data collection form. Anthropometric measurements were assessed. Generalized additive models, the minimum P-value approach, and logistic regression models were used for data analysis. Results were considered significant when α is equal to 0.05., Results: One hundred and twenty-two patients who were not on antihypertensive medication did not report hypertension, but according to ABPM data, 43.4% (n=53) of them had misclassified themselves as nonhypertensive. These patients had a significantly higher apnea-hypopnea index (P<0.001), ABPM variables (P<0.001), BMI (P=0.002), and neck circumference (NC) (P=0.002) than nonhypertensive patients (n=69). BMI and NC emerged as independent predictors of hypertension misclassification. The cut-off points that best discriminated the two groups of patients were 27 kg/m and 39 cm for BMI and NC, respectively. The resulting binary BMI and NC remained independent predictors of hypertension misclassification in the final model (odds ratio: 3.2, P=0.010; odds ratio: 2.4, P=0.038)., Conclusion: Our findings emphasize the importance of ABPM for the diagnosis of hypertension in patients suspected of having OSA with a BMI and NC above 27 kg/m and 39 cm, respectively.

Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) can be used to identify white coat hypertension and guide hypertensive treatment. We determined the percentage of ABPM claims submitted between 2007 and 2010 that were reimbursed. Among 1970 Medicare beneficiaries with submitted claims, ABPM was reimbursed for 93.8% of claims that had an International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, diagnosis code of 796.2 ("elevated blood pressure reading without diagnosis of hypertension") versus 28.5% of claims without this code. Among claims without an International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, diagnosis code of 796.2 listed, those for the component (eg, recording, scanning analysis, physician review, reporting) versus full ABPM procedures and performed by institutional versus non-institutional providers were each more than two times as likely to be successfully reimbursed. Of the claims reimbursed, the median payment was $52.01 (25th-75th percentiles, $32.95-$64.98). In conclusion, educating providers on the ABPM claims reimbursement process and evaluation of Medicare reimbursement may increase the appropriate use of ABPM and improve patient care., (Copyright © 2014 American Society of Hypertension. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Home blood pressure (BP) monitoring has been shown to be more effective than clinic BP monitoring for diagnosing and treating hypertension. However, reimbursement of home BP monitoring is uncommon in the United States because of a lack of evidence that it is cost beneficial for insurers. We develop a decision-analytic model, which we use to conduct a cost-benefit analysis from the perspective of the insurer. Model inputs are derived from the 2008 to 2011 claims data of a private health insurer in the United States, from 2009 to 2010 National Health and the Nutrition Examination Survey data, and from published meta-analyses. The model simulates the transitions among health states from initial physician visit to hypertension diagnosis, to treatment, to hypertension-related cardiovascular diseases, and patient death or resignation from the plan. We use the model to estimate cost-benefit ratios and both short- and long-run return on investment for home BP monitoring compared with clinic BP monitoring. Our results suggest that reimbursement of home BP monitoring is cost beneficial from an insurer's perspective for diagnosing and treating hypertension. Depending on the insurance plan and age group categories considered, estimated net savings associated with the use of home BP monitoring range from $33 to $166 per member in the first year and from $415 to $1364 in the long run (10 years). Return on investment ranges from $0.85 to $3.75 per dollar invested in the first year and from $7.50 to $19.34 per dollar invested in the long run., (© 2014 American Heart Association, Inc.)

Objectives: To evaluate the health system cost of a home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM) program versus usual care in an integrated healthcare system., Study Design: This cost-effectiveness analysis was based upon a previously completed randomized controlled trial of 348 hypertensive patients, in which mean systolic blood pressure (BP) was lowered 21 versus 8 mm Hg in the HBPM and usual care groups, respectively, and BP control was achieved in 54% versus 35% of patients (P < .001)., Methods: This analysis compared direct costs from the health plan perspective, including clinic visits, e-mail and telephone encounters, laboratory tests, medications, hospitalizations, and emergency department visits between the 2 groups. Primary outcomes were the incremental hypertension care-related cost of HBPM per mm Hg lowering of systolic BP per patient, per additional BP controlled, and per life-year gained., Results: Median hypertension-related cost per patient over 6 months was $455 in the HBPM group and $179 for usual care (P < .001). This increase was attributable to additional e-mail and telephone encounters, greater antihypertensive medication use, additional laboratory monitoring, and the BP monitor. Median total cost per patient was $1530 and $1283 for the HBPM and usual care groups, respectively (P = .034). The HBPM program increased hypertension-related expenditures by $20.50 per mm Hg lowering of systolic BP, $1331 per additional patient achieving BP control at 6 months, and $3330 per life-year gained., Conclusions: The HBPM program requires investment in outpatient encounters, medications, and laboratory monitoring, but produces significantly improved BP control.

Elevated blood pressure (BP) is rising in children. Significant proportions of children have reactive hypertension or masked hypertension, making ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) a valuable tool, although with potential economic implications. In youth referred for elevated BP, we sought clinic BP combinations that obviated the need for ABPM and to specify the economic role of ABPM. In a retrospective pediatric referral cohort (N = 170), we examine clinic systolic BP (SBP) predictors of components of ABPM hypertension and their combination. In economic analyses, we compared effectiveness and charges of three diagnostic pathways: (1) clinic BP alone; (2) abnormal clinic BP prompting ABPM; or (3) universal ABPM. ABPM hypertension occurred in 55 (32.4%) and reactive hypertension in 37 (21.8%), average automated (β = 0.208; 95% confidence interval, 0.027, 0.389; P = .03) and maximum auscultatory clinic SBP (β = 0.160; 95% confidence interval 0.022, 0.299; P = .02) were associated with ABPM SBP mean, but none predicted SBP load. No clinic SBP combination was associated with ABPM hypertension. Universal ABPM accrued the lowest average charge per hypertensive youth identified ($10,948). We did not identify a clinic SBP combination that predicted ABPM hypertension in youth referred for elevated BP. Universal ABPM, in this context, may be the most economically and clinically efficient diagnostic strategy., (Copyright © 2014 American Society of Hypertension. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Given the increasing use of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) in both clinical practice and hypertension research, a group of scientists, participating in the European Society of Hypertension Working Group on blood pressure monitoring and cardiovascular variability, in year 2013 published a comprehensive position paper dealing with all aspects of the technique, based on the available scientific evidence for ABPM. The present work represents an updated schematic summary of the most important aspects related to the use of ABPM in daily practice, and is aimed at providing recommendations for proper use of this technique in a clinical setting by both specialists and practicing physicians. The present article details the requirements and the methodological issues to be addressed for using ABPM in clinical practice, The clinical indications for ABPM suggested by the available studies, among which white-coat phenomena, masked hypertension, and nocturnal hypertension, are outlined in detail, and the place of home measurement of blood pressure in relation to ABPM is discussed. The role of ABPM in pharmacological, epidemiological, and clinical research is also briefly mentioned. Finally, the implementation of ABPM in practice is considered in relation to the situation of different countries with regard to the reimbursement and the availability of ABPM in primary care practices, hospital clinics, and pharmacies.

The Microlife(®) 'WatchBP Home A' oscillometric blood pressure monitor detects irregular pulse, suggestive of atrial fibrillation (AF). Early detection of AF can prevent thromboembolic stroke via anticoagulation therapy. The device was considered by the Medical Technologies Evaluation Programme of the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). The sponsor (Microlife) identified 10 studies. These were reviewed by an External Assessment Centre (EAC) which considered three relevant to the decision problem, including one which found the device detected AF more accurately (sensitivity 96.8%, specificity 88.8%) than pulse palpation (87.2, 81.3%). The EAC concluded the technology had potential to improve detection of AF, but the three studies had uncertain external validity. From a cost-consequence model with a 1-year timeframe, the sponsor calculated the device would reduce electrocardiogram (ECG) referrals and prevent strokes, but incur anticoagulation therapy costs, with net NHS savings of £11.6 million and prevention of 221 strokes, annually. The EAC criticised the model for its limited time horizon, and its consideration of symptomatic AF patients who were outside the scope issued by NICE. The EAC applied a de novo Markov model, with a 10-year timeframe. The per use saving was calculated as £2.98 for asymptomatic patients aged 65-74 years and £4.26 for those aged 75-84 years, with the prevention of 53-117 nonfatal and 28-65 fatal strokes per 100,000 people screened. Following consideration by the NICE Medical Technologies Advisory Committee, NICE judged that the case for adoption was supported by the evidence (Medical Technologies Guidance 13; MTG13).

1. Ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) monitoring (M) provides BP information at many points on any particular day during unrestricted routine daily activities, whereas home blood pressure (HBP) monitoring provides a lot of BP information obtained under fixed times and conditions over a long period of time, thus mean values of HBP provide high reproducibility, and thus an overall superiority compared with ABP.  2. HBP is at least equally or better able than ABP to predict hypertensive target organ damage and prognosis of cardiovascular disease.  3. HBPM allows for ongoing disease monitoring by patients, improves adherence to antihypertensive treatment, and can provide health-care providers with timely clinical data and direct and immediate feedback regarding diagnosis and treatment of hypertension.  4. HBPM provides BP information in relation to time; that is, BP in the morning, in the evening and at night during sleep, and it is an essential tool for the diagnosis of white-coat and masked hypertension.  5. HBPM yields minimal alerting affects and no or minimal placebo effect, and can therefore distinguish small, but significant, serial changes in BP. It is thus the most practical method for monitoring BP in the day-to-day management of hypertension. 6. The superiority of HBPM over ABPM and clinic BPM is apparent from almost all practical and clinical research perspectives., (© 2013 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd.)

Hypertension is an important public health problem, and increasingly children are being diagnosed with primary hypertension. As the list of secondary causes of hypertension is extensive, pediatric practitioners increasingly need to decide on investigations needed for evaluating children presenting with high blood pressure. The differentiation between primary and secondary hypertension is paramount to understanding this important health issue, since many forms of secondary hypertension require specific treatment. The review evaluates the current available guidelines and practice patterns for evaluating children with elevated blood pressure. The review also aims to provide a framework for cost-effective evaluation strategies for children with elevated blood pressure based on current recommendations and evidence.

Background: Web-based collaborative approaches to managing chronic illness show promise for both improving health outcomes and increasing the efficiency of the healthcare system., Objective: Analyze the cost-effectiveness of the Electronic Communications and Home Blood Pressure Monitoring to Improve Blood Pressure Control (e-BP) study, a randomized controlled trial that used a patient-shared electronic medical record, home blood pressure (BP) monitoring, and web-based pharmacist care to improve BP control (<140/90 mm Hg)., Study Design: Incremental cost-effectiveness analysis conducted from a health plan perspective., Methods: Cost-effectiveness of home BP monitoring and web-based pharmacist care estimated for percent change in patients with controlled BP and cost per mm Hg in diastolic and systolic BP relative to usual care and home BP monitoring alone., Results: A 1% improvement in number of patients with controlled BP using home BP monitoring and web-based pharmacist care-the e-BP program-costs $16.65 (95% confidence interval: 15.37- 17.94) relative to home BP monitoring and web training alone. Each mm HG reduction in systolic and diastolic BP achieved through the e-BP program costs $65.29 (59.91-70.67) relativeto home BP monitoring and web tools only. Life expectancy was increased at an incremental cost of $1850 (1635-2064) and $2220 (1745-2694) per year of life saved for men and women, respectively., Conclusions: Web-based collaborative care can be used to achieve BP control at a relatively low cost. Future research should examine the cost impact of potential long-term clinical improvements.

Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) is being used increasingly in both clinical practice and hypertension research. Although there are many guidelines that emphasize the indications for ABPM, there is no comprehensive guideline dealing with all aspects of the technique. It was agreed at a consensus meeting on ABPM in Milan in 2011 that the 34 attendees should prepare a comprehensive position paper on the scientific evidence for ABPM.This position paper considers the historical background, the advantages and limitations of ABPM, the threshold levels for practice, and the cost-effectiveness of the technique. It examines the need for selecting an appropriate device, the accuracy of devices, the additional information and indices that ABPM devices may provide, and the software requirements.At a practical level, the paper details the requirements for using ABPM in clinical practice, editing considerations, the number of measurements required, and the circumstances, such as obesity and arrhythmias, when particular care needs to be taken when using ABPM.The clinical indications for ABPM, among which white-coat phenomena, masked hypertension, and nocturnal hypertension appear to be prominent, are outlined in detail along with special considerations that apply in certain clinical circumstances, such as childhood, the elderly and pregnancy, and in cardiovascular illness, examples being stroke and chronic renal disease, and the place of home measurement of blood pressure in relation to ABPM is appraised.The role of ABPM in research circumstances, such as pharmacological trials and in the prediction of outcome in epidemiological studies is examined and finally the implementation of ABPM in practice is considered in relation to the issue of reimbursement in different countries, the provision of the technique by primary care practices, hospital clinics and pharmacies, and the growing role of registries of ABPM in many countries.

Background: Hypertensive patients (HTs) are usually attended in primary care (PC). We aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy and cost-benefit ratio of 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) in all newly diagnosed hypertensive patients (HTs) attended in PC., Methods: In a cross-sectional study ABPM was recorded in all 336 never treated HTs (Office BP ≥140 and/or ≥ 90 mm Hg) that were admitted during 16 months. Since benefits from drug treatment in white-coat hypertension (WCH) remain unproven, a cost benefit estimation of a general use of ABPM (vs absence of ABPM) in HTs was calculated comparing the cost of usual medical assistance of HTs only diagnosed in office with that based both on refraining from drug treatment all subjects identified as WCH and on the reduction by half of the frequency of biochemical exams and doctor visits., Results: Women were 56%, age 51 ± 14 years and BMI 27 ± 4 Kg/m2. Out of these, 206 were considered as true HTs, daytime ABPM ≥ 135 and/or ≥85 mm Hg and 130 (38,7%) were identified as having white coat hypertension (WCH), daytime ABPM <135/85 mm Hg. Versus HTs, WCH group showed higher percentage of women (68% vs 51%) and lower values of an index composed by the association of cardiovascular risk factors. We estimated that with ABPM total medical expenses can be reduced by 23% (157.500 euros) with a strategy based on ABPM for 1000 patients followed for 2 years., Conclusions: In PC, the widespread use of ABPM in newly diagnosed HTs increases diagnostic accuracy of hypertension, improves cardiovascular risk stratification, reduces health expenses showing a highly favourable benefit-cost ratio vs a strategy without ABPM.

Data regarding ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) or self-BP measurements at home (HBP) have been accumulated. The difference between ABP and HBP is that ABP monitoring (ABPM) provides BP information at many time points on a particular day during unrestricted routine daily activities, whereas HBP provides extensive amounts of BP information obtained under fixed times and conditions over a long period of time; thus, the mean values of HBP are stable, and the reproducibility are high. The high reproducibility of HBP is the rationale for its overall superiority over HBP compared with ABP and clinic BP (CBP). The higher practicality of HBPM over ABPM is definitely recognized. HBPM allows for ongoing disease monitoring by patients and can provide health-care providers with timely clinical data and direct and immediate feedback regarding the diagnosis and treatment of hypertension. HBP is better able than CBP to predict hypertensive target organ damage and a prognosis of cardiovascular disease. Unlike CBPM, HBPM provides BP information in relation to time, that is, BP in the morning, in the evening and at night during sleep. HBPM is an essential tool for the diagnosis of white-coat hypertension and masked hypertension. Day-to-day variability of HBP has clinical significance. HBPM yields minimal alerting effects and placebo effects. HBPM can distinguish small but significant serial changes in BP and is the most practical way to monitor BP in the day-by-day management of hypertension. HBPM improves compliance with antihypertensive medication. The operational threshold of HBP has been established. HBPM is suspected to have a great effect on the medical economy. The superiority of HBPM over ABPM and CBPM is apparent from almost all practical and clinical research perspectives. These characteristics of HBPM indicate that this method is ideal for the diagnosis and treatment of hypertension in daily practice.

Objective: To determine if an intervention consisting of telemonitoring and supervision by usual primary care clinicians of home self measured blood pressure and optional patient decision support leads to clinically important reductions in daytime systolic and diastolic ambulatory blood pressure in patients with uncontrolled blood pressure., Design: Multicentre randomised controlled trial., Setting: 20 primary care practices in south east Scotland., Participants: 401 people aged 29-95 years with uncontrolled blood pressure (mean daytime ambulatory measurement ≥ 135/85 mm Hg but ≤ 210/135 mm Hg)., Intervention: Self measurement and transmission of blood pressure readings to a secure website for review by the attending nurse or doctor and participant, with optional automated patient decision support by text or email for six months., Main Outcome Measures: Blinded assessment of mean daytime systolic ambulatory blood pressure six months after randomisation., Results: 200 participants were randomised to the intervention and 201 to usual care; primary outcome data were available for 90% of participants (182 and 177, respectively). The mean difference in daytime systolic ambulatory blood pressure adjusted for baseline and minimisation factors between intervention and usual care was 4.3 mm Hg (95% confidence interval 2.0 to 6.5; P=0.0002) and for daytime diastolic ambulatory blood pressure was 2.3 mm Hg (0.9 to 3.6; P=0.001), with higher values in the usual care group. The intervention was associated with a mean increase of one general practitioner (95% confidence interval 0.5 to 1.6; P=0.0002) and 0.6 (0.1 to 1.0; P=0.01) practice nurse consultations during the course of the study., Conclusions: Supported self monitoring by telemonitoring is an effective method for achieving clinically important reductions in blood pressure in patients with uncontrolled hypertension in primary care settings. However, it was associated with increase in use of National Health Service resources. Further research is required to determine if the reduction in blood pressure is maintained in the longer term and if the intervention is cost effective., Trial Registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN72614272.

Background: Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is known to be related to nocturnal blood pressure (BP) and nondipping hypertension. This pilot study evaluated night-time BP assessed using a home monitor in patients with OSA., Participants and Methods: Patients referred to a sleep clinic were subjected to polysomnography, clinic BP measurements, and home BP monitoring using a device that allows daytime (3 days, two duplicate readings per day) and automated night-time BP measurement (3 nights, three readings per night)., Results: Thirty-nine patients were included [72% men, mean age 48.7±10.8 years, clinic BP 131.2±19.6/84.1±11.9 mmHg, apnea-hypopnea index (AHI): 35.2±25.7]. All BP measurements were significantly correlated with the polysomnography indices. There was a consistent trend toward stronger correlations of the night-time diastolic home BP with the AHI (r=0.56), the duration of desaturation (0.53), and the maximum (-0.57) and minimum (-0.48) arterial oxygen saturation (all P<0.001). In stepwise multivariate analysis (independent variables age, sex, body weight, smoking status, and BP parameters), the AHI was associated independently with weight and night-time diastolic home BP (R=0.53)., Conclusion: In patients with OSA, the assessment of night-time BP using a home monitor appears to be feasible and related to the severity of OSA. Given the wide availability of home BP monitoring in clinical practice, this method appears to be useful in the evaluation of BP in patients with OSA.

Objective: Older adults with chronic kidney disease have a high rate of uncontrolled hypertension. Home monitoring of blood pressure (BP) is an integral part of management, but requires that patients bring records to clinic visits. Telemonitoring interventions, however, have not targeted older, less technologically-skilled populations., Methods: Veterans with stage 3 or greater chronic kidney disease and uncontrolled hypertension were randomized to a novel telemonitoring device pairing a Bluetooth-enabled BP cuff with an Internet-enabled hub, which wirelessly transmitted readings (n=28), or usual care (n=15). Home recordings were reviewed weekly and telemonitoring participants were contacted if BP was above goal. The prespecified primary endpoints were improved data exchange and device acceptability. Secondary endpoint was BP change., Results: Forty-three participants (average age 68 years, 75% white) completed the 6-month study. Average start-of-study BP was 147/78 mmHg. Those in the intervention arm had a median of 29 (IQR 22, 53) transmitted BP readings per month, with 78% continuing to use the device regularly, whereas only 20% of those in the usual care group brought readings to in-person visits. The median number of telephone contacts triggered by the wireless monitoring was 2 (IQR 1, 4) per patient. Both groups had a significant improvement in systolic BP (P<0.05, for both changes); systolic BP fell a median of 13 mmHg in monitored participants compared with 8.5 mmHg in usual care participants (P for comparison 0.31)., Conclusion: This low-cost wireless monitoring strategy led to greater sharing of data between patients and clinic and produced a trend toward improvements in BP control over usual care at 6 months.

Background: Clinic-based blood pressure (CBP) has been the default approach for the diagnosis of hypertension, but patients may be misclassified because of masked hypertension (false negative) or 'white coat' hypertension (false positive). The incorporation of other diagnostic modalities, such as home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM) and ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM), holds promise to improve diagnostic accuracy and subsequent treatment decisions., Materials and Methods: We reviewed the literature on the costs and cost-effectiveness of adding HBPM and ABPM to routine blood pressure screening in adults. We excluded letters, editorials, and studies of pregnant and/or pre-eclamptic patients, children, and patients with specific conditions (e.g. diabetes)., Results: We identified 14 original, English language studies that included cost outcomes and compared two or more modalities. ABPM was found to be cost saving for diagnostic confirmation following an elevated CBP in six studies. Three of four studies found that adding HBPM to an elevated CBP was also cost-effective., Conclusion: Existing evidence supports the cost-effectiveness of incorporating HBPM or ABPM after an initial CBP-based diagnosis of hypertension. Future research should focus on their implementation in clinical practice, long-term economic values, and potential roles in identifying masked hypertension.