The recommendation places a relatively lower value on the potential lack of device avail- ability, costs, and patient burden. In the opinion of the Work Group, many but not all patients and providers will value the information provided by ABPM and HBPM. Prior studies have found that a majority of patients prefer HBPM to ABPM. HBPM has been reported by patients to result in fewer disturbances in their daily activities and to be more comfortable than ABPM.37 39 The Work Group recognizes that some patients will nd both ABPM and HBPM to be uncomfortable and/or inconvenient, and such patients may choose to forgo measurement using these devices. Resource use and costs. This recommendation stems from studies showing that ABPM is cost-saving and cost-effective for the management of high BP in the general population. Although studies were not conducted in CKD, there is no reason to expect that the cost-savings would be any different in the CKD population.40,41 In contrast, the cost- effectiveness of HBPM for management of high BP is Persons with limited nancial resources, or those treated in health systems where ABPM and HBPM are less available or affordable, may be less inclined to follow this recommendation. Consideration for implementation. The use of ABPM or HBPM will depend on the resources available. Staff should be trained to conduct ABPM and to teach patients proper HBPM techniques. This recommendation holds true for all patients, regardless of age, sex, race, or CKD severity. 