Cost-Effectiveness and Challenges of Implementing Intensive Blood Pressure Goals and Team-Based Care
Purpose of Review
Review the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and implementation challenges of intensive blood pressure (BP) control and team-based care initiatives.
Intensive BP control is an effective and cost-effective intervention; yet, implementation in routine clinical practice is challenging. Several models of team-based care for hypertension management have been shown to be more effective than usual care to control BP. Additional research is needed to determine the cost-effectiveness of team-based care models relative to one another and as they relate to implementing intensive BP goals.
As a focus of healthcare shifts to value (i.e., cost, effectiveness, and patient preferences), formal cost-effectiveness analyses will inform which team-based initiatives hold the highest value in different healthcare settings with different populations and needs. Several challenges, including clinical inertia, financial investment, and billing restrictions for pharmacist-delivered services, will need to be addressed in order to improve public health through intensive BP control and team-based care.
KeywordsCost-effectiveness Patient care team Hypertension Blood pressure Pharmacists Nurses
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
Dr. Bress receives support to his institution from Amarin Corporation, Novartis, and Amgen unrelated to the current manuscript. The other authors declare no conflicts of interest relevant to this manuscript.
Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent
This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.
Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance
- 3.Lim SS, Vos T, Flaxman AD, Danaei G, Shibuya K, Adair-Rohani H, et al. A comparative risk assessment of burden of disease and injury attributable to 67 risk factors and risk factor clusters in 21 regions, 1990–2010: a systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study 2010. Lancet. 2013;380:2224–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 5.Whelton PK, Carey RM, Aronow WS, Casey DE Jr, Collins KJ, Dennison Himmelfarb C, et al. 2017 ACC/AHA/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/ AGS/APhA/ASH/ASPC/NMA/PCNA guideline for the prevention, detection, evaluation, and Management of High Blood Pressure in adults: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association task force on clinical P. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018;71:e127–248.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.Fisher NDL, Curfman G. Hypertension—a public health challenge of global proportions. JAMA. 2018;320:17571759.Google Scholar
- 8.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Best Practices for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention Programs: A Guide to Effective Health Care System Interventions and Community Programs Linked to Clinical Services, Promoting Team-Based Care to Improve High Blood Pressure Control [Internet]. Atlanta, GA; 2017. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/dhdsp/pubs/guides/best-practices/team-based-care.htm
- 15.Anderson JL, Heidenreich PA, Barnett PG, Creager MA, Fonarow GC, Gibbons RJ, et al. ACC/AHA statement on cost/value methodology in clinical practice guidelines and performance measures: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association task force on performance measures and task force on practice guidelines. Circulation. 2014;129:2329–45.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.• Grundy SM, Stone NJ, Bailey AL, Beam C, Birtcher KK, Blumenthal RS, et al. 2018 AHA/ACC/AACVPR/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/ADA/AGS/APhA/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline on the Management of Blood Cholesterol: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Circulation. 2019;139:e1082–143. 2018 AHA/ACC guidelines on cholesterol management that incorporates cost-effectiveness analysis into recommendations for PCSK9 use. PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 26.Bress AP, Kramer H, Khatib R, Beddhu S, Cheung AK, Hess R, et al. Potential deaths averted and serious adverse events incurred from adoption of the SPRINT intensive blood pressure regimen in the United States: projections from NHANES. Circulation. 2017;135:1617–28.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 30.Moise N, Huang C, Rodgers A, Kohli-Lynch Ciaran N, Tzong KY, Coxson PG, et al. Comparative cost-effectiveness of conservative or intensive blood pressure treatment guidelines in adults aged 35-74 years: the cardiovascular disease policy model. Hypertension. 2016;68:88–96.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 32.Lee H-Y, Jun SY, Choi J-W, Kim TY. Cost Effectiveness of Intensive Blood-Pressure Control [abstract LBPS 03–01]. J Hypertens. 2016;34:e524.Google Scholar
- 33.•• Bress AP, Bellows BK, King JB, Hess R, Beddhu S, Zhang Z, et al. Cost-effectiveness of intensive versus standard blood-pressure control. N Engl J Med. 2017;377:745–55. Cost-effectiveness analysis of intensive versus standard blood pressure control performed by the SPRINT Research Group. PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 41.Derington CG, Gums TH, Bress AP, Herrick JS, Greene TH, Moran AE, Weintraub WS, Kronish IM, Morisky DE, Trinkley KE, Saseen JJ, Reynolds K, Bates JT, Berlowitz DR, Chang TI, Chonchol M, Cushman WC, Foy CG, Herring CT, Katz LA, Krousel-Wood M, Pajewski NM, Tamariz L, King JB. Association of total medication burden with intensive and standard blood pressure control and clinical outcomes: a secondary analysis of the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT). Hypertension July 2019;74(1):267-275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 47.O’Connor PJ, Sperl-Hillen JM, Johnson PE, Rush WA, Biltz G. Clinical inertia and outpatient medical errors. Volume 2: Henriksen K, battles JB, Marks ES, Lewin DI, editors. Rockville: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2005.Google Scholar
- 52.•• Mills KT, Obst KM, Shen W, Molina S, Zhang H-J, He H, et al. Comparative effectiveness of implementation strategies for blood pressure control in hypertensive patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2018;168:110–20. Systematic review and meta-analysis that describes the effectiveness of various strategies for improving hypertension management. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 56.•• Victor RG, Lynch K, Li N, Blyler C, Muhammad E, Handler J, et al. A cluster-randomized trial of blood-pressure reduction in black barbershops. N Engl J Med. 2018;378:1291–301. Cluster-randomized trial of a pharmacist-driven blood pressure management service in black barbershops. PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 57.• Margolis KL, Asche SE, Dehmer SP, Bergdall AR, Green BB, Sperl-Hillen JM, et al. Long-term Outcomes of the Effects of Home Blood Pressure Telemonitoring and Pharmacist Management on Blood Pressure Among Adults With Uncontrolled Hypertension: Follow-up of a Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Netw Open. 2018;1:e181617. 24-month outcomes related to pharmacist-driven telehealth blood pressure management service. PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 59.Asche SE, O’Connor PJ, Dehmer SP, Green BB, Bergdall AR, Maciosek MV, et al. Patient characteristics associated with greater blood pressure control in a randomized trial of home blood pressure telemonitoring and pharmacist management. J Am Soc Hypertens. 2016;10:873–80.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 74.Allen JK, Dennison-Himmelfarb CR, Szanton SL, Bone L, Hill MN, Levine DM, et al. Community outreach and cardiovascular health (COACH) trial: a randomized, controlled trial of nurse practitioner/community health worker cardiovascular disease risk reduction in Urban Community health centers. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2011;4:595–602.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 78.•• Zhang D, Wang G, Joo H. A systematic review of economic evidence on community hypertension interventions. Am J Prev Med. 2017;53:S121–30. This systematic review describes the cost-effectiveness evidence on various team-based care strategies for hypertension management in the United States and Internationally. PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 81.•• Overwyk KJ, Dehmer SP, Roy K, Maciosek MV, Hong Y, Baker-goering MM, et al. Modeling the health and budgetary impacts of a team-based hypertension care intervention that includes pharmacists. Med Care. 2019;00:1–8. Economic analysis evaluating cost thresholds for pharmacist-delivered hypertension service to be budget-neutral in Medicare populations. Google Scholar
- 82.Simpson SH, Lier DA, Majumdar SR, Tsuyuki RT, Lewanczuk RZ, Spooner R, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of adding pharmacists to primary care teams to reduce cardiovascular risk in patients with type 2 diabetes: results from a randomized controlled trial. Diabet Med. 2015;32:899–906.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 84.van der Laan DM, Elders PJM, Boons CCLM, Nijpels G, van Dijk L, Hugtenburg JG. Effectiveness of a Patient-Tailored, Pharmacist-Led Intervention Program to Enhance Adherence to Antihypertensive Medication: The CATI Study. Front Pharmacol. 2018;9:1057.Google Scholar
- 85.Bosmans JE, van der Laan DM, Yang Y, Elders PJM, Boons CCLM, Nijpels G, et al. The Cost-Effectiveness of an Intervention Program to Enhance Adherence to Antihypertensive Medication in Comparison With Usual Care in Community Pharmacies. Front Pharmacol. 2019;10:210.Google Scholar
- 89.American Pharmacists Association. The pursuit of provider status [Internet]. Washington, D.C.; 2013. Available from: www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/
- 90.Markit IHS. 2017 update the complexities of physician supply and demand: projections from 2015 to 2030 [internet]: Washington; 2017. Available from: https://aamc-black.global.ssl.fastly.net/production/media/filer_public/a5/c3/a5c3d565-14ec-48fb-974b-99fafaeecb00/aamc_projections_update_2017.pdf
- 95.McManus RJ, Mant J, Franssen M, Nickless A, Schwartz C, Hodgkinson J, et al. Efficacy of self-monitored blood pressure, with or without telemonitoring, for titration of antihypertensive medication (TASMINH4): an unmasked randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2018;391:949–59.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 101.• Langford AT, Williams SK, Applegate M, Ogedegbe O, Braithwaite RS. Partnerships to Improve Shared Decision Making for Patients with Hypertension – Health Equity Implications. Ethn Dis. 2019;29:97–102. This paper, in conjunction with Johnson et al, describes the importance of implementing shared decision making to maximize hypertension care and reduce health disparities. PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 102.• Johnson RA, Huntley A, Hughes RA, Cramer H, Turner KM, Perkins B, et al. Interventions to support shared decision making for hypertension: a systematic review of controlled studies. Health Expect. 2018;21:1191–207. This systematic review describes the current literature on strategies to improve shared decision making with patients in hypertension care. PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar