Key result
Zero out-of-pocket antihypertensives linked to ~23% lower discontinuation with no difference in BP or CV events.
Why the study?
Does $0 out-of-pocket cost for antihypertensive medications improve adherence, BP control, and cardiovascular outcomes in veterans with newly diagnosed hypertension?
Observational (n=417,705)
Does $0 out-of-pocket cost for antihypertensive medications improve adherence, BP control, and cardiovascular outcomes in veterans with newly diagnosed hypertension?
Odds Ratio: 0.87 (95% CI 0.81–0.94)
Eliminating modest out-of-pocket costs for antihypertensive medications improves medication adherence and reduces discontinuation among veterans, though it did not significantly impact 1-year blood pressure control or cardiovascular events.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
May warrant minimizing out-of-pocket costs for antihypertensives in veterans; extends natural experiment evidence to modest thresholds.
Background: Blood pressure (BP) control remains suboptimal in the United States despite available low‐cost antihypertensive medications. Even small out‐of‐pocket medication costs may contribute to adherence. We determined whether $0 versus >$0 out‐of‐pocket costs for antihypertensive medications is associated with differences in adherence, discontinuation, BP control, and cardiovascular outcomes. Methods: We included veterans with newly diagnosed hypertension who initiated antihypertensive medication in the Veterans Health Administration from 2004 to 2022. A fuzzy regression discontinuity design with 2‐stage residual inclusion leveraged differences in medication copay policy at a 50% service‐connected disability threshold (≥50% service‐connected disability: $0 out‐of‐pocket cost versus <50%: $8 monthly cost). Outcomes included 1‐year medication nonadherence (proportion of days covered <80%), 1‐year medication discontinuation (no medication in the final 90 days of the study year), 1‐year BP control (systolic BP/diastolic BP <140/90 mm Hg and <130/80 mm Hg) and cardiovascular disease events (myocardial infarction, coronary revascularization, peripheral artery disease, or stroke). Results: Among 417 705 veterans (mean±SD age, 56 [13] years; 92% male; 61% non‐Hispanic White), 296 432 (71%) had $0 out‐of‐pocket costs. Accounting for changes in eligibility for $0 copays at the 50% service‐related disability threshold, $0 out‐of‐pocket costs were associated with lower odds of nonadherence (odds ratio [OR], 0.87 [95% CI, 0.81–0.94]) and medication discontinuation (OR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.71–0.84]). One‐year BP control <140/90 mm Hg or <130/80 mm Hg and cardiovascular disease events events were similar between groups. Conclusions: Among veterans with newly diagnosed hypertension, modest out‐of‐pocket medication costs were associated with lower adherence and discontinuation. These findings can inform ongoing discussions regarding policy levers for improving hypertension outcomes.
Zheutlin et al. (2026) conducted an observational in newly diagnosed hypertension (n=417,705). $0 out-of-pocket costs for antihypertensive medications vs. >$0 out-of-pocket costs ($8 monthly cost) was evaluated on 1-year medication nonadherence (proportion of days covered <80%) (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.81-0.94). Among veterans with newly diagnosed hypertension, $0 out-of-pocket medication costs were associated with lower odds of 1-year nonadherence (OR 0.87; 95% CI 0.81-0.94) compared to >$0 costs.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: