Racial and Ethnic Differences in Hypertension-Related Telehealth and In-Person Outpatient Visits Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic Among Medicaid Beneficiaries.

Background: Little is known about the trends and costs of hypertension management through telehealth among individuals enrolled in Medicaid. Methods: Using MarketScan® Medicaid database, we examined outpatient visits among people with hypertension aged 18-64 years. We presented the numbers of hypertension-related telehealth and in-person outpatient visits per 100 individuals and the proportion of hypertension-related telehealth outpatient visits to total outpatient visits by month, overall, and by race and ethnicity. For the cost analysis, we presented total and patient out-of-pocket (OOP) costs per visit for telehealth and in-person visits in 2021. Results: Of the 229,562 individuals, 114,445 (49.9%) were non-Hispanic White, 80,692 (35.2%) were non-Hispanic Black, 3,924 (1.71%) were Hispanic. From February to April 2020, the number of hypertension-related telehealth outpatient visits per 100 persons increased from 0.01 to 6.13, the number of hypertension-related in-person visits decreased from 61.88 to 52.63, and the proportion of hypertension-related telehealth outpatient visits increased from 0.01% to 10.44%. During that same time, the proportion increased from 0.02% to 13.9% for non-Hispanic White adults, from 0.00% to 7.58% for non-Hispanic Black adults, and from 0.12% to 19.82% for Hispanic adults. The average total and patient OOP costs per visit in 2021 were $83.82 (95% confidence interval [CI], 82.66-85.05) and $0.55 (95% CI, 0.42-0.68) for telehealth and $264.48 (95% CI, 258.87-269.51) and $0.72 (95% CI, 0.65-0.79) for in-person visits, respectively. Conclusions: Hypertension management via telehealth increased among Medicaid recipients regardless of race and ethnicity, during the COVID-19 pandemic. These findings may inform telehealth policymakers and health care practitioners.

Rural and Urban Differences in Hypertension Management Through Telehealth Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic Among Commercially Insured Patients.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic prompted a rapid increase in telehealth use. However, limited evidence exists on how rural and urban residents used telehealth and in-person outpatient services to manage hypertension during the pandemic. METHODS: This longitudinal study analyzed 701,410 US adults (18-64 years) in the MarketScan Commercial Claims Database, who were continuously enrolled from January 2017 through March 2022. We documented monthly numbers of hypertension-related telehealth and in-person outpatient visits (per 100 individuals), and the proportion of telehealth visits among all hypertension-related outpatient visits, from January 2019 through March 2022. We used Welch's two-tail t-test to differentiate monthly estimates by rural-urban status and month-to-month changes. RESULTS: From February through April 2020, the monthly number of hypertension-related telehealth visits per 100 individuals increased from 0.01 to 6.05 (P < 0.001) for urban residents and from 0.01 to 4.56 (P < 0.001) for rural residents. Hypertension-related in-person visits decreased from 20.12 to 8.30 (P < 0.001) for urban residents and from 20.48 to 10.15 (P < 0.001) for rural residents. The proportion of hypertension-related telehealth visits increased from 0.04% to 42.15% (P < 0.001) for urban residents and from 0.06% to 30.98% (P < 0.001) for rural residents. From March 2020 to March 2022, the monthly average of the proportions of hypertension-related telehealth visits was higher for urban residents than for rural residents (10.19% vs. 6.96%; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Data show that rural residents were less likely to use telehealth for hypertension management. Understanding trends in hypertension-related telehealth utilization can highlight disparities in the sustained use of telehealth to advance accessible health care.

Effectiveness evaluation of a hypertension management program in a Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC).

The objective of this study was to examine effectiveness of a Hypertension Management Program (HMP) in a Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC). From September 2018 through December 2019, we implemented HMP in seven clinics of an FQHC in rural South Carolina. A pre/post evaluation design estimated the association of HMP with hypertension control rates and systolic blood pressure using electronic health record data among 3,941 patients. A chi-square test estimated change in mean control rates in pre- and intervention periods. A multilevel multivariable logistic regression model estimated the incremental impact of HMP on odds of hypertension control. Results showed that 53.4% of patients had controlled hypertension pre-intervention (September 2016-September 2018); 57.3% had controlled hypertension at the end of the observed implementation period (September 2018-December 2019) (p < 0.01). Statistically significant increases in hypertension control rates were observed in six of seven clinics (p < 0.05). Odds of controlled hypertension were 1.21 times higher during the intervention period compared to pre-intervention (p < 0.0001). Findings can inform the replication of HMP in FQHCs and similar health care settings, which play a pivotal role in caring for patients with health and socioeconomic disparities.

Telehealth Use to Address Cardiovascular Disease and Hypertension in the United States: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis, 2011-2021.

Background: The use of telehealth for the management and treatment of hypertension and cardiovascular disease (CVD) has increased across the United States (U.S.), especially during the COVID-19 pandemic. Telehealth has the potential to reduce barriers to accessing health care and improve clinical outcomes. However, implementation, outcomes, and health equity implications related to these strategies are not well understood. The purpose of this review was to identify how telehealth is being used by U.S. health care professionals and health systems to manage hypertension and CVD and to describe the impact these telehealth strategies have on hypertension and CVD outcomes, with a special focus on social determinants of health and health disparities. Methods: This study comprised a narrative review of the literature and meta-analyses. The meta-analyses included articles with intervention and control groups to examine the impact of telehealth interventions on changes to select patient outcomes, including systolic and diastolic blood pressure. A total of 38 U.S.-based interventions were included in the narrative review, with 14 yielding data eligible for the meta-analyses. Results: The telehealth interventions reviewed were used to treat patients with hypertension, heart failure, and stroke, with most interventions employing a team-based care approach. These interventions utilized the expertise of physicians, nurses, pharmacists, and other health care professionals to collaborate on patient decisions and provide direct care. Among the 38 interventions reviewed, 26 interventions utilized remote patient monitoring (RPM) devices mostly for blood pressure monitoring. Half the interventions used a combination of strategies (e.g., videoconferencing and RPM). Patients using telehealth saw significant improvements in clinical outcomes such as blood pressure control, which were comparable to patients receiving in-person care. In contrast, the outcomes related to hospitalizations were mixed. There were also significant decreases in all-cause mortality when compared to usual care. No study explicitly focused on addressing social determinants of health or health disparities through telehealth for hypertension or CVD. Conclusions: Telehealth appears to be comparable to traditional in-person care for managing blood pressure and CVD and may be seen as a complement to existing care options for some patients. Telehealth can also support team-based care delivery and may benefit patients and health care professionals by increasing opportunities for communication, engagement, and monitoring outside a clinical setting.

Trends and Costs of US Telehealth Use Among Patients With Cardiovascular Disease Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Background The COVID-19 pandemic affected outpatient care delivery and patients' access to health care. However, no prior studies have documented telehealth use among patients with cardiovascular disease. Methods and Results We documented the number of telehealth and in-person outpatient encounters per 100 patients with cardiovascular disease and the percentage of telehealth encounters from January 2019 to June 2021, and the average payments per telehealth and in-person encounters across a 12-month period (July 2020-June 2021) using the MarketScan commercial database. From February 2020 to April 2020, the number of in-person encounters per 100 patients with cardiovascular disease decreased from 304.2 to 147.7, whereas that of telehealth encounters increased from 0.29 to 25.3. The number of in-person outpatient encounters then increased to 280.7 in June 2020, fluctuated between 268.1 and 346.4 afterward, and ended at 268.1 in June 2021, lower than the prepandemic levels. The number of telehealth encounters dropped to 16.8 in June 2020, fluctuated between 8.8 and 16.6 afterward, and ended at 8.8 in June 2021, higher than the prepandemic levels. Patients who were aged 18 to 35 years, women, and living in urban areas had higher percentages of telehealth encounters than those who were aged 35 to 64 years, men, and living in rural areas, respectively. The mean (95% CI) telehealth and in-person outpatient encounter costs per visit were $112.8 (95% CI, $112.4-$113.2) and $161.4 (95% CI, $160.4- $162.4), respectively. Conclusions There were large fluctuations in telehealth and in-person outpatient encounters during the pandemic. Our results provide insight into increased telehealth use among patients with cardiovascular disease after telehealth policy changes were implemented during the pandemic.

Estimating Costs of Implementing Stroke Systems of Care and Data-Driven Improvements in the Paul Coverdell National Acute Stroke Program.

PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the costs of implementing coordinated systems of stroke care by state health departments from 2012 through 2015 to help policy makers and planners gain a sense of the potential return on investments in establishing a stroke care quality improvement (QI) program. INTERVENTION APPROACH: State health departments funded by the Paul Coverdell National Acute Stroke Program (PCNASP) implemented activities to support the start and proficient use of hospital stroke registries statewide and coordinate data-driven QI efforts. These efforts were aimed at improving the treatment and transition of stroke patients from prehospital emergency medical services (EMS) to in-hospital care and postacute care facilities. Health departments provided technical assistance and data to support hospitals, EMS agencies, and posthospital care agencies to carry out small, rapid, incremental QI efforts to produce more effective and efficient stroke care practices. EVALUATION METHODS: Six of the 11 PCNASP-funded state health departments in the United States volunteered to collect and report programmatic costs associated with implementing the components of stroke systems of care. Six health departments reported costs paid directly by Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-provided funds, 5 also reported their own in-kind contributions, and 4 compiled data from a sample of their partners' estimated costs of resources, such as staff time, involved in program implementation. Costs were analyzed separately for PCNASP-funded expenditures and in-kind contributions by the health department by resource category and program activity. In-kind contributions by partners were also analyzed separately. RESULTS: PCNASP-funded expenditures ranged from $790,123 to $1,298,160 across the 6 health departments for the 3-year funding period. In-kind contributions ranged from $5,805 to $1,394,097. Partner contributions (n = 22) ranged from $3,912 to $362,868. IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH: Our evaluation reports costs for multiple state health departments and their partners for implementing components of stroke systems of care in the United States. Although there are limitations, our findings represent key estimates that can guide future program planning and efforts to achieve sustainability.

An Innovative Network Approach to Coordinating a National Effort to Improve Cardiovascular Health: The Case of Million Hearts.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the structure, content, quality, and quantity of partnerships that developed in response to a national cardiovascular health initiative, Million Hearts. DESIGN: This study used a social network analysis (SNA) approach to assess the Million Hearts initiative network partnerships and identify potential implications for policy and practice. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: The Million Hearts network comprised a core group of federal and private sector partners that participate in Million Hearts activities and align with initiative priorities. To bound the network for the SNA, we used a list of 58 organizations (74% response rate) from a previously completed qualitative analysis of Million Hearts partnerships. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We used the online PARTNER (Program to Analyze Record and Track Networks to Enhance Relationships-www.partnertool.net) survey to collect data on individual organizational characteristics and relational questions that asked organizations to identify and describe their relationships with other partners in the network. Key SNA measures include network density, centralizations, value, and trust. RESULTS: Our analyses show a network that is decentralized, has strong perceptions of trust and value among its members, and strong agreement on intended outcomes. Interestingly, partners report a desire and ability to contribute resources to Million Hearts; however, the perceptions between partners are that resources are not being contributed at the level they potentially could be. The majority of partners reported that being in the network helped them achieve their goals related to cardiovascular disease prevention. The largest barrier to successful activities within the network was cited as lack of targeted funding and staff to support participation in the network. CONCLUSIONS: The Million Hearts network described in this article is unique in its membership at the national level, agreement on outcomes, its powerful information-sharing abilities that require few resources, and its decentralized structure. We identified strategies that could be implemented to strengthen the network and its activities. By examining a national-level public-private partnership formed to address a public health issue, we can identify ways to strengthen the network and provide a framework for developing other initiatives.