ArticleAmerican journal of hypertension2020
Out-of-Pocket Payment for Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring Among Commercially Insured in the United States.
Article in American journal of hypertension, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Predictive Accuracy of 24-Hour Ambulatory Blood Pressure MonitoringCurrent hypertension reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Quality of Blood Pressure Monitoring During Telehealth Visits for Pregnant Patients at Risk of Preeclampsia.Telemedicine journal and e-health : the official journal of the American Telemedicine Association · 2024Article
- Economic Impact of Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring Compared With Clinical Blood Pressure Monitoring: A Simulation Model.Health services insights · 2024Article
- Postpartum ambulatory and home blood pressure monitoring in women with history of preeclampsia: Diagnostic agreement and detection of masked hypertension.Pregnancy hypertension · 2022Article
- A systematic review of pharmaceutical price mark-up practice and its implementation.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundClinical guidelines increasingly recommended ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) for hypertension diagnosis and management. Yet, ABPM is used infrequently in the United States, possibly because of low insurance coverage and high patient costs. We sought to analyze out-of-pocket payments (OPPs) for ABPM among privately insured patients.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective analysis using IBM® MarketScan® commercial claims of beneficiaries aged ≥18 years receiving ABPM from January 2012 to December 2018. The date of first ABPM claim (Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System codes 93784, 93786, 93788, or 93790) was considered the index date. Patients with 12 months of continuous enrollment preindex and 30-day postindex were included. Per beneficiary OPP was calculated by aggregating all ABPM-related OPPs within the 30-day postindex window (ABPM episode).
resultsOf 22,317 beneficiaries receiving ABPM, 62% had $0 OPP and 38% had OPP >$0. Among the latter, median OPP per beneficiary for an ABPM episode was $23 (interquartile range [IQR], $14, $32), driven primarily by full ABPM claims (median, $22; IQR, $14, $24). Among individual components, scan analysis and report claims (median, $25; IQR, $13, $49) had the greatest OPP. The median OPP per ABPM episode did not change substantively from 2012 through 2018.
conclusionsAmong commercially insured in the United States, nearly 4-in-10 have an OPP for ABPM. Though most OPPs are relatively modest, some patients incur substantial OPP. Our findings highlight the need for policymakers to ensure adequate ABPM coverage in the commercial insurance marketplace.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.