Trends in ambulatory blood pressure monitoring use for confirmation or monitoring of hypertension and resistant hypertension among the commercially insured in the U.S., 2008–2017
Raj Desai , Haesuk Park , Eric A. Dietrich , Steven M. Smith
{"title":"Trends in ambulatory blood pressure monitoring use for confirmation or monitoring of hypertension and resistant hypertension among the commercially insured in the U.S., 2008–2017","authors":"Raj Desai , Haesuk Park , Eric A. Dietrich , Steven M. Smith","doi":"10.1016/j.ijchy.2020.100033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) has been increasingly recommended for diagnosis confirmation and monitoring in patients with new-onset hypertension and apparent treatment-resistant hypertension (aTRH). We assessed insurance claims submitted for ABPM among a nationally representative sample of commercially insured U.S. patients.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional analysis using the IBM MarketScan® commercial claims database from January 2008–December 2017, including 2 populations: those with incident treated hypertension (ITH; first antihypertensive filled) or aTRH (first overlapping use of 4 antihypertensive agents). We identified ABPM claims filed within 6 months before to 6 months after the qualifying antihypertensive fill and determined prevalence of ABPM use overall and by year in each population.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>In total, 2,820,303 patients met ITH criteria and 298,049 met aTRH criteria. Of those with ITH, 7650 (2.7 per 1000 persons) had ≥1 ABPM claim submitted, and annual ABPM prevalence ranged from 2.0 to 3.7 per 1000 persons, increasing over time (<em>P</em><sub>trend</sub><0.0001). Among those with aTRH, 630 (2.1 per 1000 persons) had ≥1 ABPM claim submitted, and annual ABPM prevalence ranged from 1.6 to 2.7 per 1000 persons, decreasing over time (<em>P</em><sub>trend</sub> = 0.054). Timing of ABPM claims suggested they were used primarily for diagnosis confirmation in ITH, and more evenly distributed between diagnosis confirmation and monitoring in aTRH.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Despite guideline recommendations for more widescale use, ABPM appears to be used rarely in the U.S., with fewer than 0.5% of commercially insured patients with newly treated hypertension or aTRH having ABPM claims submitted to their insurance.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":36839,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Cardiology: Hypertension","volume":"6 ","pages":"Article 100033"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.ijchy.2020.100033","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Cardiology: Hypertension","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590086220300100","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7
Abstract
Background
Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) has been increasingly recommended for diagnosis confirmation and monitoring in patients with new-onset hypertension and apparent treatment-resistant hypertension (aTRH). We assessed insurance claims submitted for ABPM among a nationally representative sample of commercially insured U.S. patients.
Methods
We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional analysis using the IBM MarketScan® commercial claims database from January 2008–December 2017, including 2 populations: those with incident treated hypertension (ITH; first antihypertensive filled) or aTRH (first overlapping use of 4 antihypertensive agents). We identified ABPM claims filed within 6 months before to 6 months after the qualifying antihypertensive fill and determined prevalence of ABPM use overall and by year in each population.
Results
In total, 2,820,303 patients met ITH criteria and 298,049 met aTRH criteria. Of those with ITH, 7650 (2.7 per 1000 persons) had ≥1 ABPM claim submitted, and annual ABPM prevalence ranged from 2.0 to 3.7 per 1000 persons, increasing over time (Ptrend<0.0001). Among those with aTRH, 630 (2.1 per 1000 persons) had ≥1 ABPM claim submitted, and annual ABPM prevalence ranged from 1.6 to 2.7 per 1000 persons, decreasing over time (Ptrend = 0.054). Timing of ABPM claims suggested they were used primarily for diagnosis confirmation in ITH, and more evenly distributed between diagnosis confirmation and monitoring in aTRH.
Conclusions
Despite guideline recommendations for more widescale use, ABPM appears to be used rarely in the U.S., with fewer than 0.5% of commercially insured patients with newly treated hypertension or aTRH having ABPM claims submitted to their insurance.