HSR&D Citation Abstract
Search | Search by Center | Search by Source | Keywords in Title
Modeled Health and Economic Impact of Team-Based Care for Hypertension.
Dehmer SP, Baker-Goering MM, Maciosek MV, Hong Y, Kottke TE, Margolis KL, Will JC, Flottemesch TJ, LaFrance AB, Martinson BC, Thomas AJ, Roy K. Modeled Health and Economic Impact of Team-Based Care for Hypertension. American journal of preventive medicine. 2016 May 1; 50(5 Suppl 1):S34-44.
Team-based interventions for hypertension care have been widely studied and shown effective in improving hypertension outcomes. Few studies have evaluated long-term effects of these interventions; none have assessed broad-scale implementation. This study estimates the prospective health, economic, and budgetary impact of universal adoption of a team-based care intervention model that targets people with treated but uncontrolled hypertension in the U.S.
Analysis was conducted in 2014-2015 using a microsimulation model, constructed with various data sources from 1948 to 2014, designed to evaluate prospective cardiovascular disease (CVD)-related interventions in the U.S.
Ten-year primary outcomes included prevalence of uncontrolled hypertension; incident myocardial infarction, stroke, CVD events, and CVD-related mortality; intervention and net medical costs by payer; productivity; and quality-adjusted life years.
About 4.7 million (13%) fewer people with uncontrolled hypertension and 638,000 prevented cardiovascular events would be expected over 10 years. Assuming $525 per enrollee, implementation would cost payers $22.9 billion, but $25.3 billion would be saved in averted medical costs. Estimated net cost savings for Medicare approached $5.8 billion. Net costs were especially sensitive to intervention costs, with break-even thresholds of $300 (private), $450 (Medicaid), and $750 (Medicare).
Nationwide adoption of team-based care for uncontrolled hypertension could have sizable effects in reducing CVD burden. Based on the study''s assumptions, the policy would be cost saving from the perspective of Medicare and may prove to be cost effective from other payers'' perspectives. Expected net cost savings for Medicare would more than offset expected net costs for all other insurers.