Abstract 4140639: Efficacy of Remote Patient Monitoring in Managing Hypertension in Federally Qualified Health Centers versus Primary Care Settings

Background: Remote patient monitoring (RPM) has proven highly effective in managing hypertension (HTN). A key strength of RPM lies in its ability to continuously monitor patients, especially those with limited access to traditional healthcare settings. Hypothesis: Do patients in Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) respond to RPM for HTN management as effectively as patients in traditional primary care settings (PC)? Goals/Aims: To compare the effectiveness of RPM between FQHC and traditional primary care populations. Specifically, we focused on patients who transmitted data at least 50% of the time, consistent with the CPT code for RPM billing, and who had been on the program for at least one year. Methods: Patients were equipped with cellular-enabled BP cuffs. Clinical staff met monthly with patients to review data and discuss lifestyle changes. Patients with an average SBP ≥140 mmHg or DBP ≥90 mmHg during the first 7 days, enrolled for ≥365 days, and transmitted data ≥50% of days, were analyzed. Data comparisons were made between the average of the first seven BP readings and the last seven BP readings. Results/Data: The PC group (n = 495) averaged 640 ± 280 days on the program, while FQHC patients (n = 429) averaged 599 ± 136 days. Both groups demonstrated significant improvements (p < 0.0001) with RPM. PC patients reduced SBP from 150.7 to 135.2 mmHg (-15.5), and FQHC patients improved from 152.3 to 134.9 mmHg (-17.4). Baseline and final SBP readings were not significantly different between groups. DBP also markedly improved (P < 0.0001): PC from 86.4 to 77.7 mmHg (-8.7 mmHg) and FQHC from 92.4 to 81.9 mmHg (-10.6 mmHg). FQHC patients had higher DBP at both baseline and study end (p < 0.0001). Surprisingly, FQHC patients experienced a greater improvement in mean arterial pressure (MAP) compared to PC patients (-11.1% vs. -9.9%; p < 0.05). Average transmission frequency was higher in PC patients (73.3%) compared to FQHC patients (70.3%; p < 0.01). Conclusion: RPM significantly improves HTN management, leading to substantial reductions in blood pressure and MAP in both FQHC and primary care populations. These findings support RPM as an effective tool for managing hypertension remotely and enhancing health equity, making it a valuable strategy in diverse healthcare settings.