Save Money and Resources with Natriuretic Peptides

"It is clear that BNP testing has the potential to deliver diagnostic improvements and more efficient use of health service resources."

Dr. Hilda Crockett. Clinical Laboratory International. 2004.¹⁷

The use of CNH assays may reduce the need for other cardiac investigations and, thus, save money and resources on additional clinical assessment approaches, which are often time consuming, expensive, invasive and sometimes potentially harmful for the patient. Further, the CNHs can help save money and resources by identifying patients who most need the limited resources of heart transplantation.¹³ For example:

• Screening high-risk individuals with CNH before echocardiography could reduce the cost per detected case of left ventricular systolic dysfunction by 26% for a cost ratio of 1:20 (CNH/echocardiogram). More reduced costs could be predicted for the group of low-risk individuals (up to 50%).³
• Cardiologists from the U.K. and Denmark calculated that the use of CNHs can reduce the cost of screening by between 26% and 45%.¹⁸
• An economic analysis published by the U.K. National Health Service suggests that 33% to 36% of echocardiograms could be avoided with CNH testing. This is based on the fact that echocardiography is not considered to be a viable route to diagnosis. This feeling is fueled by data that suggests that a relatively low number of patients are actually found to be suffering from HF after being referred for an echocardiogram. The "diagnostic yield" of echocardiography in terms of patients with confirmed HF is estimated to be between 1:2 and 1:4.¹⁹
• Another study determined that the mean total cost of treatment of patients tested with CNH was $5,410 (U.S.), compared with $7,264 for patients using the standard methods.²⁰

For more information on Natriuretic Peptides, please click on the following topics:

What Are Natriuretic Peptides?

Clinical Relevance of CNH Assays

Comparison of CNH Assays

Save Money and Resources with Natriuretic Peptides