A comparison of healthcare utilization and outcomes following skin vs. serum-specific IgE allergy testing.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the cost, healthcare utilization, and outcomes between skin and serum-specific IgE (sIgE) allergy testing. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used IBM® MarketScan claims data, from which commercially insured individuals who initiated allergy testing between January 1 and December 31, 2018 with at least 12 months of enrollment data before and after index testing date were included. Cost of allergy testing per patient was estimated by testing pattern: skin only, sIgE only, or both. Multivariable linear regression was used to compare healthcare utilization and outcomes, including office visits, allergy and asthma-related prescriptions, and emergency department (ED) and urgent care (UC) visits between skin and sIgE testing at 1-year post testing (α = 0.05). RESULTS: The cohort included 168,862 patients, with a mean (SD) age of 30.8 (19.5) years; 100,666 (59.7%) were female. Over half of patients (56.4%, n = 95,179) had skin only testing, followed by 57,291 patients with sIgE only testing and 16,212 patients with both testing. The average cost of allergy testing per person in the first year was $430 (95% CI $426-433) in patients with skin only testing, $187 (95% CI $183-190) in patients with sIgE only testing, and $532 (95% CI $522-542) in patients with both testing. At 1-year follow-up post testing, there were slight increases in allergy and asthma-related prescriptions, and notable decreases in ED visits by 17.0-17.4% and in UC visits by 10.9-12.6% for all groups (all p < 0.01). Patients with sIgE-only testing had 3.2 fewer allergist/immunologist visits than patients with skin-only testing at 1-year follow-up (p < 0.001). Their healthcare utilization and outcomes were otherwise comparable. CONCLUSIONS: Allergy testing, regardless of the testing method used, is associated with decreases in ED and UC visits at 1-year follow-up. sIgE allergy testing is associated with lower testing cost and fewer allergist/immunologist visits, compared to skin testing.

From office to digital primary care services: analysing income-related inequalities in utilization.

The use of digital technologies to deliver primary health care has increased over the past decade. While some technologies have been shown to be medically effective and efficient, the effects of digital primary care on the policy goal of equality in the use of such types of care have not been studied using large register data. The aim of this study was to analyse how digital contacts differ from officebased visits by income as an indicator of socioeconomic status. Specifically, we estimated differences in primary care utilization across income, factors of contribution to these inequalities, and applied a needs-based standardisation of utilization to estimate differences in equity.We used a purposively built consultation level dataset with 726 000 Swedish adult patients diagnosed with an infection, including clinical and sociodemographic variables. Applying concentration indexes (CI) and graphical illustrations we measured how the two types of services are distributed relative to income. We estimated how much of the inequalities were attributed to different sociodemographic factors by decomposing the concentration indexes. Standardised utilization for sex, age and comorbidity allowed for the estimation of horizontal inequity indexes for both types of services.Utilization by the two types of care showed large income inequalities. Office-based visits were propoor (CI -0.116), meaning lowincome patients utilized relatively more of these services, while digital contacts were prorich (CI 0.205). However, within the patient group who had at least one digital contact, the utilization was also propoor (CI -0,101), although these patients had higher incomes on average. The standardised utilization showed a smaller prorich digital utilization (CI 0.143), although large differences remained. Decomposing the concentration indexes showed that education level and being born in Sweden were strong attributes of prorich digital service utilization.The prorich utilization effects of digital primary care may risk undermining the policy goals of access and utilization to services regardless of socioeconomic status. As digital health technologies continue to expand, policy makers need to be aware of the risk.

Caregiver Perspectives on Barriers and Facilitators to Timely Well-Child Visits for Black Infants.

OBJECTIVES: Missed infant well-child visits (WCV) result in lost opportunities for critical preventive care. Black infants consistently receive less WCV care than other racial groups. We sought to understand barriers and facilitators to timely infant WCV for Black families in the context of COVID-19. METHODS: We conducted 21 semi-structured interviews with caregivers of Medicaid-insured Black children aged 15- to 24-months who attended six or fewer of eight recommended well-child visits within the first 15 months of life. Interviews focused on WCV value, barriers, and facilitators. After developing our initial coding structure through rapid qualitative analysis, we inductively derived the final codebook and themes through line-by-line content analysis. RESULTS: Caregivers attended a mean of 3.53 of eight infant visits. Structural (e.g., transportation) and psychological (e.g., maternal depression) barriers delayed Black infant WCV. Families most frequently valued monitoring development and addressing concerns. Caregivers perceived visits as less urgent when infants seemed healthy or more recently avoided visits due to fears around COVID-19. Long waits and feeling rushed/dismissed were linked to WCV delays; positive provider relationships encouraged WCV attendance. Most caregivers reported reluctance to vaccinate. Vaccine hesitancy contributed to delayed infant WCV. CONCLUSIONS: Caregivers described several factors that impacted WCV attendance for Black infants. Persistent structural and psychological barriers are compounded by perceptions that caregiver time is not respected and by notable vaccine hesitancy. To address these barriers, well-care can meet Black families in their communities, better address caregiver wellbeing, more efficiently use caregiver and provider time, and cultivate partnerships with Black caregivers.

Telemedicine Use Among Physicians by Physician Specialty: United States, 2021.

The 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic led to an increase in telemedicine use among physicians, from 15.4% in 2019 to 86.5% in 2021 (1-4). Interest has increased in how telemedicine has affected a physician's ability to deliver quality care similar to an in-person office visit, and in technological barriers to telemedicine use (5). This report describes telemedicine use and challenges among physicians sampled in the 2021 National Electronic Health Records Survey. This report builds upon previous work (4) and describes the use of telemedicine, ability to provide quality care during telemedicine visits, satisfaction with telemedicine, and appropriateness of telemedicine use by physician specialty type.

Patient attitudes, experiences, and satisfaction with healthcare and office visit utilization among Medicare beneficiaries with type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVES: To examine patient attitudes, experiences, and satisfaction with healthcare associated with office visit utilization among Medicare beneficiaries with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: We analyzed the 2019 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey Public Use File of beneficiaries aged ≥65 years with type 2 diabetes (n = 1092). The ordinal dependent variable was defined as 0, 1 to 5, and ≥6 office visits. An ordinal partial proportional odds model was conducted to examine associations of beneficiaries' attitudes, experiences, and satisfaction with healthcare and office visit utilization. RESULTS: Among the beneficiaries, approximately 17.7%, 22.8%, and 59.5% reported having 0, 1 to 5, and ≥6 office visits, respectively. Being male (OR = 0.67, p = 0.004), Hispanic (OR = 0.53, p = 0.006), divorced/separated (OR = 0.62, p = 0.038) and living in a non-metro area (OR = 0.53, p < 0.001) were associated with a lower likelihood of attending more office visits. Trying to keep sickness to themselves (OR = 0.66, p = 0.002) and dissatisfaction with the ease and convenience of getting to providers from home (OR = 0.45, p = 0.010) were associated with a lower likelihood of having more office visits. DISCUSSION: The proportion of beneficiaries foregoing office visits is concerning. Attitudes concerning healthcare and transportation challenges can be barriers to office visits. Efforts to ensure timely and appropriate access to care should be prioritized for Medicare beneficiaries with diabetes.

Patient Satisfaction with Postoperative Telemedicine Versus In-Office Visits Following Primary Hip Arthroscopy: A Prospective Observational Study Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Abstract Background: The purpose of this study was to compare satisfaction with postoperative telemedicine visits versus in-office visits among patients undergoing primary hip arthroscopy. Methods: A prospective cohort study was conducted involving subjects ≥18 years old undergoing primary hip arthroscopy at a single center from January 2020 to February 2021. Subjects chose between a telemedicine or in-office visit for 6-week follow-up. Patient satisfaction after the 6-week visit was assessed using an electronic survey. The primary outcome was satisfaction on a scale from 0 to 10. Intergroup comparisons of outcomes were performed using Student's t-test, Mann-Whitney U test, or Fisher's exact test. p-Values <0.05 were considered significant. Results: Seventy-five patients (28M and 47F) were enrolled in the study with mean age 41.2 ± 12.7 years. Forty-four patients (58.7%) attended in-office visits and 31 (41.3%) attended telemedicine visits. There were no significant intergroup differences in age, gender, body mass index, or American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification (p > 0.05). There were no significant intergroup differences in satisfaction with overall care (in-office 9.6 vs. telemedicine 9.3, p = 0.08) or the 6-week visit (in-office 9.0 vs. telemedicine 8.0, p = 0.06). The telemedicine group more frequently reported visits taking <20 min (p = 0.002) and spending >10 min with their surgeon (p = 0.01). However, 51.6% of the telemedicine group and 74.7% of the entire cohort expressed a retrospective preference for in-office visits. Conclusions: There were no significant differences in satisfaction scores between hip arthroscopy patients assigned to telemedicine versus in-office visits for 6-week follow-up, but most patients expressed a preference for in-office visits.

Comparison between visit-to-visit office and 24-h blood pressure variability in treated hypertensive patients.

OBJECTIVES: In any treated hypertensive patient office blood pressure (BP) values may differ between visits and this variability (V) has an adverse prognostic impact. However, little information is available on visit-to-visit 24-h BPV. METHODS: In 1114 hypertensives of the ELSA and PHYLLIS trials we compared visit-to-visit office and 24-h mean BPV by coefficient of variation (CV) of the mean systolic (S) and diastolic (D) BP obtained from yearly measurements during a 3-4 year treatment period. Visit-to-visit BPV during daytime and night-time were also compared. RESULTS: Twenty-four-hour SBP-CV was about 20% less than office SBP-CV ( P  < 0.0001). SBP-CV was considerably greater for the night-time than for the daytime period (20%, P  < 0.0001). Results were similar for DBP and in males and females, older and younger patients, patients under different antihypertensive drugs or with different baseline or achieved BP values. In the group as a whole and in subgroups there was significant correlations between office and 24-h BP-CV but the correlation coefficients was weak, indicating that office SBP or DBP CV accounted for only about 1-4% of 24-h SBP or DBP-CV values. CONCLUSION: Twenty-four-hour mean BP across visits is more stable than across visit office BP. Visit-to-visit office and 24-h BPV are significantly related to each other, but correlation coefficients are low, making visit-to-visit office BP variations poorly predictive of the concomitant 24-h BP variations and thus of on-treatment ambulatory BP stability.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Office Blood Pressure Measurement and Home Blood Pressure Monitoring for Hypertension Screening Among Adults: Results From the IDH Study.

BACKGROUND: Using high awake blood pressure (BP; ≥130/80 mm Hg) on ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) as a reference, the purpose of this study was to determine the accuracy of high office BP (≥130/80 mm Hg) at an initial visit and high confirmatory office BP (≥130/80 mm Hg), and separately, high home BP (≥130/80 mm Hg) among participants with high office BP (≥130/80 mm Hg) at an initial office visit. METHODS AND RESULTS: The accuracy of office BP measurements using the oscillometric method for detecting high BP on ABPM was determined among 379 participants with complete office BP and ABPM data in the IDH (Improving the Detection of Hypertension) study. For detecting high BP on ABPM, the accuracy of high confirmatory office BP using the oscillometric method and, separately, high home BP was also determined among the subgroup of 122 participants with high office BP at an initial visit and complete home BP monitoring data. High office BP had moderate sensitivity (0.61 [95% CI, 0.53-0.68]) and high specificity (0.85 [95% CI, 0.80-0.90]) for high awake BP. High confirmatory office BP and high home BP had moderate sensitivity (0.69 [95% CI, 0.59-0.79] and 0.79 [95% CI, 0.71-0.87], respectively) and low and moderate specificity (0.44 [95% CI, 0.27-0.61] and 0.72 [95% CI, 0.56-0.88], respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Many individuals with high BP on ABPM do not have high office BP. Confirmatory office BP and home blood pressure monitoring also had limited ability to identify individuals with high BP on ABPM.

Proportion Of Preventive Primary Care Visits Nearly Doubled, Especially Among Medicare Beneficiaries, 2001-19.

There is debate about the value of preventive visits in primary care, and multiple policy trends during the past fifteen years may have influenced the likelihood of US adults undergoing preventive primary care visits. Using nationally representative, serial cross-sectional data on adult visits to primary care physicians from the 2001-19 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, we characterized temporal trends in the proportion of primary care visits with a preventive focus and the differential characteristics of these visits. Based on a sample of 139,783 unweighted (5,902,144,258 weighted) US primary care visits, we found that the proportion of primary care visits with a preventive focus increased between 2001 and 2019 (12.8 percent of visits in 2001-02 versus 24.6 percent in 2018-19; [Formula: see text]), with the greatest rate of increase seen for people with Medicare. Primary care visits with a preventive focus involved more time spent with the physician and addressed fewer reasons for the visit compared with problem-based visits. At least one of the following was significantly more likely to occur during a preventive visit than a problem-based visit: counseling provision, ordering of preventive labs, or ordering of a preventive image or procedure. Our findings demonstrate a relative increase in preventive versus problem-based visits in primary care and suggest the importance of enhanced insurance coverage in influencing preventive care delivery trends.

What Brings You in Today? Sex, Race, Substance Type, and Other Sociodemographic and Health-Related Characteristics Predict if Substance Use is the Main Reason for a Clinical Encounter.

Background: Substance-related diagnoses (SRDs) are a common healthcare presentation. This study identified sociodemographic and health-related characteristics associated with having an SRD as the primary reason for a clinical encounter compared to those with an SRD who are treated for other reasons. Methods: Electronic health record (EHR) data on patients with an SRD (n=12,358, ages 18-90) were used to assess if an SRD was the primary reason for a clinical encounter from January 1, 2012-January 1, 2018. Patients were matched on key demographic characteristics at a 1:1 ratio. Adjusting for covariates, odds ratios, and 95% confidence intervals were calculated. Results: In the matched cohort of 8,630, most reported male sex (65.8%), White race (70.0%), and single marital status (62.7%) with a mean age of 47.2 (SD=14.6). Patient reported female sex, Black race, age 70+, married status, and low-income (<$50,000) were associated with a lower likelihood of presenting to care for an SRD as the primary reason for a clinical encounter. A nicotine-, alcohol-, opioid-, or stimulant-related diagnosis was associated with a higher likelihood of presenting to care for an SRD as the primary reason for the clinical visit. Conclusion: This is the first study to investigate whether sociodemographic and health-related characteristics were associated with having an SRD as the primary reason for a clinical encounter. Using rigorous methods, we investigated a unique clinical question adding new knowledge to predictors of patients seeking clinical care. Understanding these predictors can help us better align service provision with population needs and inform new approaches to tailoring care.

Racecadotril for the treatment of acute gastroenteritis in children received outpatient care in Qatar

Introduction: Acute gastroenteritis is a clinical syndrome often defined by increased stool frequency (eg, ≥3 loose or watery stools in 24 hours, also it is one of the most common causes of morbidity and mortality in children under 5 years in the developing world. Racecadotril is an antisecretory agent that can prevent fluid/electrolyte depletion from the bowel as a result of acute diarrhea without affecting intestinal motility. Research question or hypothesis: To investigate whether prescribing Racecadotril plus oral rehydrating solution in outpatient care helps to decrease the hospital revisit rate within 72 hours due to acute gastroenteritis in comparison with oral rehydrating solution alone. Study design: Retrospective cohort study. Methods: Pediatric patients aged 3 months to 14 years visited Al Wakra Pediatric emergency department due to acute gastroenteritis for outpatient care in the period between 1/1/2022 till 30/06/2022 were included. Case group was defined as patients who prescribed oral rehydrating solution plus Racecadotril upon their initial visit. Control group was defined as patients who prescribed only oral rehydrating solution upon their initial visit. Results: 2505 pediatric patients were included, 520 patients were enrolled in the control group, and 1985 patients were included in the case group. Most patients in both groups were 1 to 5 years old (67% in control group, and 59% in case group). The hospital revisit rate within 72 hours due to gastroenteritis was slightly less in case group 7.1% in comparison with 7.5% in control group (Relative risk 0.95, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.34). Most patients (88%) who revisited the hospital due to gastroenteritis within 72 hours showed no or mild signs of clinical dehydration in their initial visit (77% in control group, and 93% in case group) Conclusion: Racecadotril was found to have insignificant impact on hospital revisit rate in acute pediatric gastroenteritis managed at outpatient setting. (AU)

Evaluación de las visitas a urgencias previas a un diagnóstico de VIH: oportunidades perdidas / Evaluation of emergency department visits prior to an HIV diagnosis: Missed opportunities

Objetivo: Existe una elevada tasa de infección oculta y diagnóstico tardío en el VIH. Los servicios de urgencias hospitalarios (SUH) son un punto importante de atención sanitaria. El presente trabajo tiene el objetivo conocer el número de oportunidades perdidas para el diagnóstico de VIH que ocurren en los SUH. Método: Estudio multicéntrico de cohortes retrospectivo que incluyó a todos los pacientes diagnosticados de infección por el VIH en el año 2019 en 27 hospitales españoles de 7 comunidades autónomas diferentes. Se revisaron todos los episodios de consulta en los SUH en los 5años previos al diagnóstico para conocer el motivo de consulta y si este representaba una oportunidad perdida para el diagnóstico de VIH. Resultado: Se incluyeron 723 pacientes, y 352 de ellos (48,7%; IC95%: 45,1-52,3%) presentaron al menos una visita a un SUH durante los 5años anteriores al diagnóstico (mediana2; p25-p75: 1-4). Ciento dieciocho pacientes (16,3%; IC95%: 13,8-19,2%) presentaron oportunidad perdida de diagnóstico. Las principales consultas fueron consumo de drogas (145 [15%]), infecciones de transmisión sexual (91 [9,4%]) y solicitud de profilaxis de VIH postexposición (39 [4%]). Ciento cincuenta y cinco (42,9%) de los 352 tenían menos de 350CD4/mm3 cuando se estableció el diagnóstico de VIH. En los pacientes con visitas previas a urgencias, el tiempo medio hasta el diagnóstico desde esta visita fue de 580 (DE647) días. Conclusiones: El 16% de los pacientes diagnosticados de VIH perdieron la oportunidad de ser diagnosticados en los 5años previos al diagnóstico, lo que pone de manifiesto la necesidad de implementar medidas de cribado en los SUH diferentes a las actuales para mejorar estos resultados.(AU)

Objective: There is a high rate of occult infection and late diagnosis in HIV. Hospital emergency departments (ED) are an important point of health care. The present work aims to know the number of missed opportunities for HIV diagnosis occurring in the ED. Method: Retrospective multicenter cohort study that included all patients diagnosed with HIV infection in 2019 in 27 Spanish hospitals in 7 different autonomous communities. All ED consultation episodes in the 5years prior to diagnosis were reviewed to find out the reason for consultation and whether this represented a missed opportunity for HIV diagnosis. Result: Seven hundred twenty-three patients were included, and 352 (48.7%; 95%CI: 45.1%-52.3%) had at least one ED visit during the 5years prior to diagnosis (median2; p25-p75: 1-4). One hundred and eighteen patients (16.3%; 95%CI: 13.8%-19.2%) had a missed diagnostic opportunity. The main consultations were drug use (145 [15%]), sexually transmitted infections (91 [9.4%]) and request for post-exposure HIV prophylaxis (39 [4%]). One hundred and fifty-five (42.9%) of the 352 had less than 350CD4/mm3 when the HIV diagnosis was established. In patients with previous ED visits, the mean time to diagnosis from this visit was 580 (SD647) days. Conclusions: Sixteen percent of patients diagnosed with HIV missed the opportunity to be diagnosed in the 5years prior to diagnosis, highlighting the need to implement ED screening measures different from current ones to improve these outcomes.(AU)

Presence of Primary Care Physicians and Patients' Ability to Register: A Simulated-Patient Survey in the Paris Region.

Using the health care system fully in some countries requires patients to register with a primary care physician (PCP). Public health policies measure PCP density to maintain satisfactory local PCP supplies and limit geographic inequalities. In an exhaustive simulated-patient survey in the Paris, France region, we analyzed how well presence of PCPs was associated with patients' ability to register for care. Of 5,188 census blocks, 55.4% had at least 1 PCP; however, only 38.6% had at least 1 PCP accepting registration for office visits, and only 19.4% had at least 1 PCP accepting registration for home visits (P <.001 across the 3 indicators). Cross-block inequalities in accepting registration were steeper than those related to PCP density, indicating that this density metric offers false reassurance and is inadequate to support policy decisions.

Relative billing complexity of in-person versus telehealth outpatient encounters.

RATIONALE: Video visits became more widely available during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. However, the ongoing role and value of video visits in care delivery and how these may have changed over time are not well understood. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: Compare the relative complexity of in-person versus video visits during the COVID-19 pandemic and describe the complexity of video visits over time. METHODS: We used billing data for in-person and video revisits from non-behavioural health specialities with the most video visit utilisation (≥50th percentile) at a large, urban, public healthcare system from 1 January 2021 to 31 March 2022. We used current procedural terminology (CPT) codes as a proxy for information gathering and decision-making complexity and time spent on an encounter. We compared the distribution of CPT codes 99211-99215 between in-person and video visits using Fisher's exact tests. We used Spearman correlation to test for trends between proportions of CPT codes over time for video visits. RESULTS: Ten specialities (adult primary care, paediatrics, adult dermatology, bariatric surgery, paediatric endocrinology, obstetrics and gynaecologist, adult haematology/oncology, paediatric allergy/immunology, paediatric gastroenterology, and paediatric pulmonology) met inclusion criteria. For each speciality, proportions of each CPT code for in-person visits and for video visits varied significantly, and patterns of variation differed by speciality. For example, in adult primary care, video visits had smaller proportions of moderate/high complexity visits (99214 and 99215) and greater proportions of lower complexity visits (99211-99213) compared with in-person visits (p < 0.001), but in paediatric endocrinology, the opposite was seen (p < 0.001). Trends in CPT codes over time for video visits in each speciality were also mixed. CONCLUSION: In-person and video visits had differing proportions of complexity codes (typically skewing towards lower complexity for video visits). The complexity of video visits changed over time in many specialities. Observed patterns for both phenomena varied by speciality.

Caregiver Versus Surgeon Concerns in New Diagnosis of Congenital Hand and Upper Extremity Anomalies.

PURPOSE: The initial office visit can be a stressful time for families with children with congenital upper extremity differences. These families may have concerns that differ from the information that pediatric hand surgeons believe is important to discuss. The purpose of this study was to compare topics that families and surgeons believe are most important to address at the initial office visits to better inform and guide that visit. METHODS: Qualitative interviews were conducted with 15 pediatric hand surgeons and 17 caregivers of children with congenital upper extremity differences. Interviews were conducted using semi-structured guides. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using thematic analysis to identify recurring themes from both study groups. RESULTS: Overarching themes were similar between the groups and included diagnosis/cause, treatment, psychosocial considerations, future outcomes, and further resources. However, emphasis among these themes differed, with surgeons emphasizing the cause and events leading up to the diagnosis and caregivers preferring to discuss next steps and treatment options. Surgeons also discussed feelings of grief or guilt more commonly than the caregivers. CONCLUSIONS: Although surgeons emphasize the cause and psychosocial impact of a newly diagnosed congenital upper extremity difference at the initial office visit, caregivers mostly focused on the future and next steps that can be taken. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Surgeons should ensure to address these issues so that families are comfortable with the treating surgeon and believe that their concerns are being adequately addressed.

Association between office visit intervals and long-term cardiovascular risk in hypertensive patients.

Hypertension is a chronic disease that requires long-term follow-up in many patients, however, optimal visit intervals are not well-established. This study aimed to evaluate the incidences of major cardiovascular events (MACEs) according to visit intervals. We analyzed data from 9894 hypertensive patients in the Korean Hypertension Cohort, which enrolled and followed up 11,043 patients for over 10 years. Participants were classified into five groups based on their median visit intervals (MVIs) during the 4-year period and MACEs were compared among the groups. The patients were divided into clinically relevant MVIs of one (1013; 10%), two (1299; 13%), three (2732; 28%), four (2355; 24%), and six months (2515; 25%). The median follow-up period was 5 years (range: 1745 ± 293 days). The longer visit interval groups did not have an increased cumulative incidence of MACE (12.9%, 11.8%, 6.7%, 5.9%, and 4%, respectively). In the Cox proportional hazards model, those in the longer MVI group had a smaller hazard ratio (HR) for MACEs or all-cause death: 1.77 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.45-2.17), 1.7 (95% CI: 1.41-2.05), 0.90 (95% CI: 0.74-1.09) and 0.64 (95% CI: 0.52-0.79), respectively (Reference MVI group of 75-104 days). In conclusion, a follow-up visits with a longer interval of 3-6 months was not associated with an increased risk of MACE or all-cause death in hypertensive patients. Therefore, once medication adjustment is stabilized, a longer interval of 3-6 months is reasonable, reducing medical expenses without increasing the risk of cardiovascular outcomes.