Many digital health hypertension tools aren’t effective or worth the cost, according to a new study published Monday.
The study is the latest from the Peterson Health Technology Institute, a digital health research group that previously analyzed virtual solutions focused on diabetes and physical therapy. The group's analysis on virtual hypertension concludes that programs focused on behavior change and blood pressure monitoring fall short of providing strong clinical outcomes that would reduce long-term costs.
Related: Study: Digital diabetes tools not worth the cost
The report is another blow to digital health companies that are attempting to gain traction in a crowded buyer's market. Caroline Pearson, executive director of the Peterson Health Technology Institute, said many of the virtual hypertension programs offered to patients were no more effective than a patient receiving in-person care from a primary care clinician.
“I do believe that these [tools] are better than nothing, but when we have alternatives that are better than these solutions we should prioritize [them].” Pearson said. “We just have to continue to raise the bar on expectations that we see clinical outcomes, not just patient support.”
Behavior change tools from digital health companies Omada Health, DarioHealth, Lark, Hello Heart and Teladoc Health’s Livongo showed an incremental ability to decrease systolic blood pressure, according to the report. But the report's authors said those solutions increased net spending because the limited improvements of blood pressure did not offset the costs to adopt the tools. Peterson said evidence did not support broader adoption of these behavior change tools for most patients.
Spokespeople from DarioHealth and Lark did not respond to a request for comment.
Dr. Tejaswi Kompala, head of cardiometabolic clinical strategy at Teladoc Health, said in an emailed statement the study’s methodology excluded data on the compounding benefits of Teladoc's multi-condition programs.
Dr. Edo Paz, senior vice president of medical affairs at Hello Heart, said in a statement the research was flawed, which led to misinformed recommendations. Paz said the company stood by its peer-reviewed clinical research studies.
Omada Health's Chief Medical Officer Dr. Carolyn Bradner Jasik said the assessment inadequately grouped companies with very different offerings and narrowly focused on select clinical metrics.
The report found blood pressure monitoring programs from digital health companies AMC Health, VitalSight and HRS delivered slightly greater, but not clinically meaningful, systolic blood pressure declines compared with usual care. The programs increased net health spending at current remote-patient monitoring reimbursement rates, according to the report. Authors said the evidence may support adoption for providers who consistently act on the monitoring data.
Spokespeople from AMC Health, VitalSight and HRS did not respond to a request for comment.
Authors did say evidence supported broader adoption of medication management tools from companies like Cadence, Ochsner Digital Medicine and Story Health. Authors said patients in these programs experienced clinically meaningful drops in systolic blood pressure that exceeded traditional care. The authors said these programs have the potential to offset long-term costs due to lower risk of cardiovascular events.
Dan Shields, CEO of Ochsner Digital Medicine, said its program was initially developed for internal use in 2015. After using it for the health system’s patients and employees, the health system found the program enhanced care for its own patients and employees. In September, New Orleans-based Ochsner announced it was expanding its digital medicine program to offer weight management.
“Monitoring is only the first step, you have to be able to clinically intervene,” Shields said. “It is more about managing the condition as a whole.”
A Cadence spokesperson said the company "applauded" the study's validation of its model.
Tom Stanis, Story Health CEO and co-founder, said in a statement the report highlighted the effectiveness of the company’s care model.
