Value-based approach to blood pressure telemonitoring and remote counseling in hypertensive patients. (2nd January 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Ionov, Mikhail V.; Zhukova, Olga V.; Yudina, Yulia S.; Avdonina, Natalya G.; Emelyanov, Igor V.; Kurapeev, Dmitri I.; Zvartau, Nadezhda E.; Konradi, Alexandra O.
• Is Part Of: Blood pressure. Volume 30:Number 1(2021)
• Page Start: 20
• Page End: 30
• Publication Date: 2021-01-02
• Subjects: Hypertension -- telemonitoring -- e-health -- value-based medicine -- patient-reported outcome measures -- patient-reported experience measures -- Markov model -- cost-effectiveness; Blood pressure -- Periodicals; Hypertension -- Periodicals; Hypertension -- Periodicals; Blood Pressure -- Periodicals; 612.14
• DOI: 10.1080/08037051.2020.1813015
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0803-7051

Abstract

Abstract: Purpose: Blood pressure telemonitoring and remote counselling (BPTM) improves blood pressure (BP) control in patients with hypertension (HTN). Studies assessing the efficacy of BPTM from a value-based perspective are lacking. We investigated whether BPTM fits all principles of the value-based approach (clinical and economic effectiveness, improvement in patient-reported outcome/experience measures (PROM/PREM)). Materials and methods: Two hundred and forty ambulatory patients with uncontrolled HTN were randomised in a 2: 1 manner to BPTM ( n = 160, mean age 47 y.o.) and usual care (UC, n = 80; 49 y.o.) with baseline and 3-month follow-up clinic visits. BPTM employed a mobile application (for patients) and a desktop version (for clinician), which allowed communication and exchange of medical data. The main outcomes were changes in office and ambulatory systolic (S) BPs, rate of BP control. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) were evaluated in economic analysis. The MOS SF-36 score was taken as a PROM, and the PEQ score was used as a PREM. Results: Larger decreases in office and ambulatory SBPs (–16.8 and −8.9 mm Hg, respectively; p < .05) was achieved in BPTM group while the treatment intensity was equal (2.4 drugs). The ICER 11.1 EUR/–1 mm Hg 24-hour SBP/1 year was 75% effective as per willingness-to-pay threshold. BPTM improved PROM (+2.1 in mean MOS SF-36; p = .04), reduced long-term mortality (+0.11 life years gained), leading to +0.49 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained as compared with UC. The ICUR was 4 169.4 EUR/QALY gained. Patient-reported experience was higher in the BPTM (+10 PEQ, p = .01). The UC group showed minor changes in MOS SF-36 and PEQ (+1.3; +6, respectively; p n.s.). Conclusions: Being cost-effective, BPTM incorporates both clinical benefits and patient-perceived value. Larger randomised studies are needed to confirm our findings.