Back

Modeling effect of hypertension control on death, incidence of atrial fibrillation and economic impact to Medicare and hospitals.

Williams, J.; Mencer, N.; Mak, W. Y.; Dalle Luche, G.; Dundovic, S.

2026-07-17 health systems and quality improvement
10.64898/2026.07.15.26358198 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background Hypertension is a major modifiable risk factor for atrial fibrillation (AF), yet blood pressure (BP) control remains suboptimal in older U.S. adults. Objectives This study evaluated how improve systolic BP (SBP) control could affect incident AF, downstream AF ablation demand, Medicare savings, and hospital revenue. Methods A population-based modelling framework was developed to estimate mortality and incident AF hazards across SBP strata: <120, 120-139, 140-159, and ?160 mm/Hg. AF incidence in the SBP <120 mmHg group was set at 2.2 per 1,000 person-year, with hazard ratios of 1.17, 1.42 and 1.64 applied to higher SBP strata. We assumed 25% of incident AF patients would undergo ablation, with a 7.2% complication rate. AF prevalence was projected to increase by 4.6% annually over 10 years. Medicare savings and hospital revenue foregone were estimated under varying procedure cost and contribution-margin assumptions. Results Higher SBP was associated with greater hazards of death and incident AF. Improved SBP control reduced projected AF incidence and ablation demand. Over 10 years, cumulative Medicare savings were projected at $8.7B-$10.9B across the full modelled population. However, reduced ablation volume translated into hospital revenue foregone, ranging from $75M to $377M in the first year, and approximately $1.03B-$5.2B cumulatively over 10 years. Conclusions Improved SBP control may reduce AF incidence, prevent avoidable invasive ablation procedures, relieve pressure on surgical waitlists, and generate substantial Medicare savings. However, these benefits may reduce hospital procedural revenue, highlighting a misalignment between prevention-oriented care and fee-for-service reimbursement incentives.

Matching journals

The top 1 journal accounts for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.