Why the study?
Does the introduction of ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) measurement reduce medical costs and improve clinical outcomes in Japanese adults aged 40 years and older with hypertension?
Does the introduction of ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) measurement reduce medical costs and improve clinical outcomes in Japanese adults aged 40 years and older with hypertension?
The introduction of ambulatory blood pressure measurement for hypertension management in Japan is projected to be highly cost-effective, potentially saving 9.48 trillion yen over 10 years while reducing strokes and deaths.
Projected savings suggest potential value of ABP in Japanese hypertension; leaves open prospective validation before practice change.
In recent years soaring medical costs have become a major social problem in developed countries. Ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) measurements have a stronger predictive power for cardiovascular events than clinic blood pressure (CBP) measurements. Therefore the introduction of ABP measurement for the diagnosis and treatment of hypertension should lead to a decrease in medical expenditure. This study presents calculations of the cost saving and life years associated with changing from CBP to ABP measurement as diagnostic tool. We constructed a Markov model using data from the Ohasama study and a Japanese national database. Study population was 7.042 million individuals aged 40 years and above living in Japan. The introduction of ABP for hypertension would result in a reduction of about 9.48 trillion yen per 10 years. We conducted a sensitivity analysis and found that the introduction of ABP was associated with at least a cost reduction of 47500 billion yen. But it did not provide significant extension of average life years. However the introduction of ABP for hypertension treatment would be a very effective method in perspective of public health because it reduced about 59600 individuals of stroke and about 18900 individuals of death. Given its cost-effectiveness, extensive application of ABP measurement in clinical practice is expected.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tamaki et al. (2010) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: