Economic Impact of Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring Compared With Clinical Blood Pressure Monitoring: A Simulation Model.

BACKGROUND

Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) is considered the gold standard for proper diagnosis of hypertension. Yet, access to ABPM in the U.S. is limited, and the extent of coverage by commercial health plans remains uncertain, potentially limiting access to ABPM among commercially insured patients.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to assess the net cost impact of using ABPM in comparison to clinical blood pressure monitoring (CBPM) in the U.S. over a 5-year time period.

DESIGN METHODS

Using a Markov Model, we estimate the 5-year cumulative cost impact of using ABPM to confirm a prior diagnosis of primary hypertension using CBPM to avoid treatment for white-coat hypertension (WCH) in a hypothetical cohort of 1000 patients from a U.S. healthcare system perspective. The probability and cost inputs for the model were derived from available literature. Base-case model parameters were varied to account for different scenarios.

RESULTS

Base-case results indicate using ABPM instead of CBPM over 5 years saves a total of $348,028, reflecting an average per-person-per-year (PPPY) cost saving of $70. In sensitivity analyses, almost all cases reveal ABPM as a cost-saving approach compared to CBPM, with cost savings reaching up to $228 PPPY in the highest hypertension treatment cost model. Regression results reveal that ABPM was cost-saving compared to CBPM if ABPM annual payment rates are $100 or less and annual hypertension treatment costs are ⩾$300.

CONCLUSION

The potential cost-savings of using ABPM instead of CBPM found in our simulation model underscores the need for confirmatory research using real-world data to support increased use of ABPM as the standard diagnostic approach for hypertension.