TY - JOUR
T1 - Association of Structured Virtual Visits for Hypertension Follow-Up in Primary Care with Blood Pressure Control and Use of Clinical Services
AU - Levine, David Michael
AU - Dixon, Ronald F.
AU - Linder, Jeffrey A.
N1 - Funding Information:
Dr. Dixon is the developer of the virtual visit program. Partners HealthCare and Massachusetts General Hospital Department of Population Health Management supported the development and implementation of the virtual visit platform. Neither Dr. Dixon, Partners HealthCare, nor Massachusetts General Hospital funded this study. All remaining authors declare that they do not have a conflict of interest.
Funding Information:
Funders Dr. Levine received funding support from an Institutional National Research Service Award from (T32HP10251), the Ryoichi Sasakawa Fellowship Fund, and by the Brigham and Women’s Hospital Division of General Internal Medicine and Primary Care. The NIH had no role in the design and conduct of the study; the collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; or the preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2018, Society of General Internal Medicine.
PY - 2018/11/1
Y1 - 2018/11/1
N2 - Background: Optimal management of hypertension requires frequent monitoring and follow-up. Novel, pragmatic interventions have the potential to engage patients, maintain blood pressure control, and enhance access to busy primary care practices. “Virtual visits” are structured asynchronous online interactions between a patient and a clinician to extend medical care beyond the initial office visit. Objective: To compare blood pressure control and healthcare utilization between patients who received virtual visits compared to usual hypertension care. Design: Propensity score-matched, retrospective cohort study with adjustment by difference-in-differences. Participants: Primary care patients with hypertension. Exposure: Patient participation in at least one virtual visit for hypertension. Usual care patients did not use a virtual visit but were seen in-person for hypertension. Main measures: Adjusted difference in mean systolic blood pressure, primary care office visits, specialist office visits, emergency department visits, and inpatient admissions in the 180 days before and 180 days after the in-person visit. Key results: Of the 1051 virtual visit patients and 24,848 usual care patients, we propensity score-matched 893 patients from each group. Both groups were approximately 61 years old, 44% female, 85% White, had about five chronic conditions, and about 20% had a mean pre-visit systolic blood pressure of 140–160 mmHg. Compared to usual care, virtual visit patients had an adjusted 0.8 (95% CI, 0.3 to 1.2) fewer primary care office visits. There was no significant adjusted difference in systolic blood pressure control (0.6 mmHg [95% CI, − 2.0 to 3.1]), specialist visits (0.0 more visits [95% CI, − 0.3 to 0.3]), emergency department visits (0.0 more visits [95% CI, 0.0 to 0.01]), or inpatient admissions (0.0 more admissions [95% CI, 0.0 to 0.1]). Conclusions: Among patients with reasonably well-controlled hypertension, virtual visit participation was associated with equivalent blood pressure control and reduced in-office primary care utilization.
AB - Background: Optimal management of hypertension requires frequent monitoring and follow-up. Novel, pragmatic interventions have the potential to engage patients, maintain blood pressure control, and enhance access to busy primary care practices. “Virtual visits” are structured asynchronous online interactions between a patient and a clinician to extend medical care beyond the initial office visit. Objective: To compare blood pressure control and healthcare utilization between patients who received virtual visits compared to usual hypertension care. Design: Propensity score-matched, retrospective cohort study with adjustment by difference-in-differences. Participants: Primary care patients with hypertension. Exposure: Patient participation in at least one virtual visit for hypertension. Usual care patients did not use a virtual visit but were seen in-person for hypertension. Main measures: Adjusted difference in mean systolic blood pressure, primary care office visits, specialist office visits, emergency department visits, and inpatient admissions in the 180 days before and 180 days after the in-person visit. Key results: Of the 1051 virtual visit patients and 24,848 usual care patients, we propensity score-matched 893 patients from each group. Both groups were approximately 61 years old, 44% female, 85% White, had about five chronic conditions, and about 20% had a mean pre-visit systolic blood pressure of 140–160 mmHg. Compared to usual care, virtual visit patients had an adjusted 0.8 (95% CI, 0.3 to 1.2) fewer primary care office visits. There was no significant adjusted difference in systolic blood pressure control (0.6 mmHg [95% CI, − 2.0 to 3.1]), specialist visits (0.0 more visits [95% CI, − 0.3 to 0.3]), emergency department visits (0.0 more visits [95% CI, 0.0 to 0.01]), or inpatient admissions (0.0 more admissions [95% CI, 0.0 to 0.1]). Conclusions: Among patients with reasonably well-controlled hypertension, virtual visit participation was associated with equivalent blood pressure control and reduced in-office primary care utilization.
KW - blood pressure control
KW - hypertension
KW - telemedicine
KW - virtual visit
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85045841672&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85045841672&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s11606-018-4375-0
DO - 10.1007/s11606-018-4375-0
M3 - Article
C2 - 29687432
AN - SCOPUS:85045841672
SN - 0884-8734
VL - 33
SP - 1862
EP - 1867
JO - Journal of general internal medicine
JF - Journal of general internal medicine
IS - 11
ER -