Literature DB >> 21868086

Cost-effectiveness of options for the diagnosis of high blood pressure in primary care: a modelling study.

Kate Lovibond1, Sue Jowett, Pelham Barton, Mark Caulfield, Carl Heneghan, F D Richard Hobbs, James Hodgkinson, Jonathan Mant, Una Martin, Bryan Williams, David Wonderling, Richard J McManus.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of hypertension has traditionally been based on blood-pressure measurements in the clinic, but home and ambulatory measurements better correlate with cardiovascular outcome, and ambulatory monitoring is more accurate than both clinic and home monitoring in diagnosing hypertension. We aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of different diagnostic strategies for hypertension.
METHODS: We did a Markov model-based probabilistic cost-effectiveness analysis. We used a hypothetical primary-care population aged 40 years or older with a screening blood-pressure measurement greater than 140/90 mm Hg and risk-factor prevalence equivalent to the general population. We compared three diagnostic strategies-further blood pressure measurement in the clinic, at home, and with an ambulatory monitor-in terms of lifetime costs, quality-adjusted life years, and cost-effectiveness.
FINDINGS: Ambulatory monitoring was the most cost-effective strategy for the diagnosis of hypertension for men and women of all ages. It was cost-saving for all groups (from -£56 [95% CI -105 to -10] in men aged 75 years to -£323 [-389 to -222] in women aged 40 years) and resulted in more quality-adjusted life years for men and women older than 50 years (from 0·006 [0·000 to 0·015] for women aged 60 years to 0·022 [0·012 to 0·035] for men aged 70 years). This finding was robust when assessed with a wide range of deterministic sensitivity analyses around the base case, but was sensitive if home monitoring was judged to have equal test performance to ambulatory monitoring or if treatment was judged effective irrespective of whether an individual was hypertensive.
INTERPRETATION: Ambulatory monitoring as a diagnostic strategy for hypertension after an initial raised reading in the clinic would reduce misdiagnosis and save costs. Additional costs from ambulatory monitoring are counterbalanced by cost savings from better targeted treatment. Ambulatory monitoring is recommended for most patients before the start of antihypertensive drugs. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research and the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence.
Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21868086     DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(11)61184-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lancet        ISSN: 0140-6736            Impact factor:   79.321


  107 in total

1.  Hypertension: Ambulatory blood-pressure monitoring has arrived.

Authors:  Lawrence R Krakoff
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2011-10-11       Impact factor: 32.419

Review 2.  Doctors record higher blood pressures than nurses: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Christopher E Clark; Isabella A Horvath; Rod S Taylor; John L Campbell
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 5.386

Review 3.  Clinical significance of home blood pressure and its possible practical application.

Authors:  Yutaka Imai
Journal:  Clin Exp Nephrol       Date:  2013-07-03       Impact factor: 2.801

4.  Are there enough GPs in England to detect hypertension and maintain access?

Authors:  Christine A'Court; Helen Atherton; Andrew Dalton; Susannah Fleming; Jennifer Hirst; David Nunan; Mary Selwood; Richard J McManus
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 5.386

5.  Clinical predictors and impact of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in pediatric hypertension referrals.

Authors:  Marguerite L Davis; Michael A Ferguson; Justin P Zachariah
Journal:  J Am Soc Hypertens       Date:  2014-06-02

6.  Is primary care research important and relevant to GPs?

Authors:  Richard Hobbs
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2019-08-29       Impact factor: 5.386

Review 7.  The complexity of masked hypertension: diagnostic and management challenges.

Authors:  Stanley S Franklin; Nathan D Wong
Journal:  Curr Hypertens Rep       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 5.369

8.  Outcome-Driven Thresholds for Ambulatory Blood Pressure Based on the New American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Classification of Hypertension.

Authors:  Yi-Bang Cheng; Lutgarde Thijs; Zhen-Yu Zhang; Masahiro Kikuya; Wen-Yi Yang; Jesus D Melgarejo; José Boggia; Fang-Fei Wei; Tine W Hansen; Cai-Guo Yu; Kei Asayama; Takayoshi Ohkubo; Eamon Dolan; Katarzyna Stolarz-Skrzypek; Sofia Malyutina; Edoardo Casiglia; Lars Lind; Jan Filipovský; Gladys E Maestre; Yutaka Imai; Kalina Kawecka-Jaszcz; Edgardo Sandoya; Krzysztof Narkiewicz; Yan Li; Eoin O'Brien; Ji-Guang Wang; Jan A Staessen
Journal:  Hypertension       Date:  2019-08-05       Impact factor: 10.190

9.  NHLBI integrated pediatric guidelines: battle for a future free of cardiovascular disease.

Authors:  Justin P Zachariah; Sarah D de Ferranti
Journal:  Future Cardiol       Date:  2013-01

Review 10.  Clinical value of ambulatory blood pressure: Is it time to recommend for all patients with hypertension?

Authors:  Yalcin Solak; Kazuomi Kario; Adrian Covic; Nathan Bertelsen; Baris Afsar; Abdullah Ozkok; Andrzej Wiecek; Mehmet Kanbay
Journal:  Clin Exp Nephrol       Date:  2015-10-22       Impact factor: 2.801

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.