Skip to Main Content
TABLE 20

Comparison of HTN Screening Strategies

DimensionOption A (Clinic BP Alone)Option B (Clinic BP Confirmed by ABPM)Option C (ABPM Only)Preferred OptionAssumptions Made
Population: 170 cardiology, nephrology referred patients; analyzed at single-patient level Auscultatory or oscillatory BP >95% Auscultatory or oscillatory BP >90% then ABPM Patients referred to provider who only used ABPM — — 
Operational factors 
 Percent adherence to care (goal of 80%) Assumes 100% Assumes 100% Assumes 100% — — 
 Care delivery team effects Baseline Additional work to arrange or interpret confirmatory ABPM Additional work to arrange and interpret ABPM for all patients — Assumes ABPM can be arranged and interpreted correctly 
 Patient, family effects Baseline Less desirable to have more visits; more desirable to have better accuracy Family opinion depends on family’s values — 
Benefits 
 Clinical significance Baseline If HTN, treatment improves long-term outcome If HTN, treatment improves long-term outcome WCH estimated at 35%, ABPM results in fewer false-positive screening results 
Cost of options 
 Visit, diagnosis costs (annual estimated cost for 1 patient) $1860 for visits and laboratory tests $1330 for visits, ABPM, and laboratory tests $1880 for visits, ABPM, and laboratory tests — 
Costs from complications, adverse events, nonoptimal treatment 
 Likelihood of nonoptimal treatment 60% undiagnosed patients; 35% of those diagnosed with WCH 30% undiagnosed patients All patients correctly diagnosed; fewer complications Assumes treatment benefit for correctly diagnosed HTN has no complications 
 Costs of nonoptimal treatment Increased mortality for not treating undiagnosed HTN; inconvenience of treatment of patients with WCH Increased mortality for not treating undiagnosed HTN All patients correctly diagnosed who are treated — 
DimensionOption A (Clinic BP Alone)Option B (Clinic BP Confirmed by ABPM)Option C (ABPM Only)Preferred OptionAssumptions Made
Population: 170 cardiology, nephrology referred patients; analyzed at single-patient level Auscultatory or oscillatory BP >95% Auscultatory or oscillatory BP >90% then ABPM Patients referred to provider who only used ABPM — — 
Operational factors 
 Percent adherence to care (goal of 80%) Assumes 100% Assumes 100% Assumes 100% — — 
 Care delivery team effects Baseline Additional work to arrange or interpret confirmatory ABPM Additional work to arrange and interpret ABPM for all patients — Assumes ABPM can be arranged and interpreted correctly 
 Patient, family effects Baseline Less desirable to have more visits; more desirable to have better accuracy Family opinion depends on family’s values — 
Benefits 
 Clinical significance Baseline If HTN, treatment improves long-term outcome If HTN, treatment improves long-term outcome WCH estimated at 35%, ABPM results in fewer false-positive screening results 
Cost of options 
 Visit, diagnosis costs (annual estimated cost for 1 patient) $1860 for visits and laboratory tests $1330 for visits, ABPM, and laboratory tests $1880 for visits, ABPM, and laboratory tests — 
Costs from complications, adverse events, nonoptimal treatment 
 Likelihood of nonoptimal treatment 60% undiagnosed patients; 35% of those diagnosed with WCH 30% undiagnosed patients All patients correctly diagnosed; fewer complications Assumes treatment benefit for correctly diagnosed HTN has no complications 
 Costs of nonoptimal treatment Increased mortality for not treating undiagnosed HTN; inconvenience of treatment of patients with WCH Increased mortality for not treating undiagnosed HTN All patients correctly diagnosed who are treated — 

—, none.

Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal