Dataset Information

Diagnostic accuracy and yield of screening tests for atrial fibrillation in the family practice setting: a multicentre cohort study.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Detection of undiagnosed or undertreated ("actionable") atrial fibrillation could increase the use of appropriate oral anticoagulant therapy and reduce the risk of stroke. We sought to compare newer screening technologies with a pulse-check for the detection of atrial fibrillation and to determine whether the detection of actionable atrial fibrillation increases the use of oral anticoagulant agents. METHODS:This prospective multicentre cohort study involved 22 primary care clinics. We recruited participants aged 65 years and older who were attending routine appointments. Each participant underwent 3 methods of screening: a 30-second radial pulse-check; single-lead electrocardiogram; and screening by blood pressure machine with atrial fibrillation detection algorithms. Participants who received a positive result on 1 or more test underwent 12-lead electrocardiogram with or withour 24-hour Holter. Screening tests were compared using the McNemar test. Participants with confirmed atrial fibrillation received follow-up at 90 days. RESULTS:The mean age of participants was 73.7 (± 6.9) years, and 53.4% of participants were female. Of 2171 patients, we had data from all 3 screening tests for 2054 patients. Both single-lead electrocardiogram and the blood pressure device showed superior specificity compared with pulse-check (p < 0.001 for each). Fifty-six patients (2.7%) had confirmed atrial fibrillation: 12 patients had newly detected atrial fibrillation (none of the patients were using anticoagulation agents), and 44 patients had previously diagnosed atrial fibrillation (42 patients were receiving anticoagulant therapy, 2 were not). Thus, 14 patients had actionable atrial fibrillation (0.7%). By 90 days, 77% of patients with actionable atrial fibrillation had started anticoagulant therapy. INTERPRETATION:Newer screening technologies showed superior specificity compared with a pulse-check. Screening detected undiagnosed or undertreated atrial fibrillation in 0.7% of participants, and 77% started appropriate anticoagulant therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT02262351.

SUBMITTER: Quinn FR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6182120 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Jul-Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Diagnostic accuracy and yield of screening tests for atrial fibrillation in the family practice setting: a multicentre cohort study.

Quinn F Russell FR Gladstone David J DJ Ivers Noah M NM Sandhu Roopinder K RK Dolovich Lisa L Ling Andrea A Nakamya Juliet J Ramasundarahettige Chinthanie C Frydrych Paul A PA Henein Sam S Ng Ken K Congdon Valerie V Birtwhistle Richard V RV Ward Richard R Healey Jeffrey S JS

CMAJ open 20180701 3

<h4>Background</h4>Detection of undiagnosed or undertreated ("actionable") atrial fibrillation could increase the use of appropriate oral anticoagulant therapy and reduce the risk of stroke. We sought to compare newer screening technologies with a pulse-check for the detection of atrial fibrillation and to determine whether the detection of actionable atrial fibrillation increases the use of oral anticoagulant agents.<h4>Methods</h4>This prospective multicentre cohort study involved 22 primary c ...[more]

PMID: 30072410

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAtrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia worldwide. Early diagnosis of AF is crucial for preventing AF-related morbidity, mortality, and economic burden, yet the detection of the disease remains challenging. The 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) is the gold standard for the diagnosis of AF. Because of technological advances, ambulatory devices may serve as convenient screening tools for AF.ObjectiveThe objective of this review was to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of 2 relatively new technologies used in ambulatory devices, non-12-lead ECG and photoplethysmography (PPG), in detecting AF. We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of non-12-lead ECG and PPG compared to the reference standard, 12-lead ECG. We also conducted a subgroup analysis to assess the impact of study design and participant recruitment on diagnostic accuracy.MethodsThis systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. MEDLINE and EMBASE were systematically searched for articles published from January 1, 2015 to January 23, 2021. A bivariate model was used to pool estimates of sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), and area under the summary receiver operating curve (SROC) as the main diagnostic measures. Study quality was evaluated using the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies (QUADAS-2) tool.ResultsOur search resulted in 16 studies using either non-12-lead ECG or PPG for detecting AF, comprising 3217 participants and 7623 assessments. The pooled estimates of sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR, and diagnostic odds ratio for the detection of AF were 89.7% (95% CI 83.2%-93.9%), 95.7% (95% CI 92.0%-97.7%), 20.64 (95% CI 10.10-42.15), 0.11 (95% CI 0.06-0.19), and 224.75 (95% CI 70.10-720.56), respectively, for the automatic interpretation of non-12-lead ECG measurements and 94.7% (95% CI 93.3%-95.8%), 97.6% (95% CI 94.5%-99.0%), 35.51 (95% CI 18.19-69.31), 0.05 (95% CI 0.04-0.07), and 730.79 (95% CI 309.33-1726.49), respectively, for the automatic interpretation of PPG measurements.ConclusionsBoth non-12-lead ECG and PPG offered high diagnostic accuracies for AF. Detection employing automatic analysis techniques may serve as a useful preliminary screening tool before administering a gold standard test, which generally requires competent physician analyses. Subgroup analysis indicated variations of sensitivity and specificity between studies that recruited low-risk and high-risk populations, warranting future validity tests in the general population.Trial registrationPROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42020179937; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=179937.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the diagnostic performance of a UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence-recommended automatic oscillometric blood pressure (BP) measurement device incorporated with an atrial fibrillation (AF) detection algorithm (Microlife WatchBP Home A) for real-world AF screening in a primary healthcare setting. SETTING:Primary healthcare setting in Hong Kong. INTERVENTIONS:This was a prospective AF screening study carried out between 1 September 2014 and 14 January 2015. The Microlife device was evaluated for AF detection and compared with a reference standard of lead-I ECG. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES:Diagnostic performance of Microlife for AF detection. RESULTS:5969 patients (mean age: 67.2±11.0 years; 53.9% female) were recruited. The mean CHA2DS2-VASc ( C : congestive heart failure [1 point]; H : hypertension [1 point]; A2 : age 65-74 years [1 point] and age ?75 years [2 points]; D : diabetes mellitus [1 point]; S : prior stroke or transient ischemic attack [2 points]; VA : vascular disease [1 point]; and Sc : sex category [female] [1 point])score was 2.8±1.3. AF was diagnosed in 72 patients (1.21%) and confirmed by a 12-lead ECG. The Microlife device correctly identified AF in 58 patients and produced 79 false-positives. The corresponding sensitivity and specificity for AF detection were 80.6% (95% CI 69.5 to 88.9) and 98.7% (95% CI 98.3 to 98.9), respectively. Among patients with a false-positive by the Microlife device, 30.4% had sinus rhythm, 35.4% had sinus arrhythmia and 29.1% exhibited premature atrial complexes. With the low prevalence of AF in this population, the positive and negative predictive values of Microlife device for AF detection were 42.4% (95% CI 34.0 to 51.2) and 99.8% (95% CI 99.6 to 99.9), respectively. The overall diagnostic performance of Microlife device to detect AF as determined by area under the curves was 0.90 (95% CI 0.89 to 0.90). CONCLUSIONS:In the primary care setting, Microlife WatchBP Home was an effective means to screen for AF, with a reasonable sensitivity of 80.6% and a high negative predictive value of 99.8%, in addition to its routine function of BP measurement. In a younger patient population aged <65 years with a lower prevalence of AF, Microlife WatchBP Home A demonstrated a similar diagnostic accuracy.

Project description:BackgroundMalaria has a negative effect on the outcome of pregnancy. Pregnant women are at high risk of severe malaria and severe haemolytic anaemia, which contribute 60-70% of foetal and perinatal losses. Peripheral blood smear microscopy under-estimates sequestered placental infections, therefore malaria rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) detecting histidine rich protein-2 antigen (HRP-2) in peripheral blood are a potential alternative.MethodsHRP-2 RDTs accuracy in detecting malaria in pregnancy (MIP >28 weeks gestation) and placental Plasmodium falciparum malaria (after childbirth) were conducted using Giemsa microscopy and placental histopathology respectively as the reference standard. The study was conducted in Mbale Hospital, using the midwives to perform and interpret the RDT results. Discordant results samples were spot checked using PCR techniques.ResultsAmong 433 febrile women tested, RDTs had a sensitivity of 96.8% (95% CI 92-98.8), specificity of 73.5% (95% CI 67.8-78.6), a positive predictive value (PPV) of 68.0% (95% CI 61.4-73.9), and negative predictive value (NPV) of 97.5% (95% CI 94.0-99.0) in detecting peripheral P. falciparum malaria during pregnancy. At delivery, in non-symptomatic women, RDTs had a 80.9% sensitivity (95% CI 57.4-93.7) and a 87.5% specificity (95%CI 80.9-92.1), PPV of 47.2% (95% CI 30.7-64.2) and NPV of 97.1% (95% CI 92.2-99.1) in detecting placental P. falciparum infections among 173 samples. At delivery, 41% of peripheral infections were detected by microscopy without concurrent placental infection. The combination of RDTs and microscopy improved the sensitivity to 90.5% and the specificity to 98.4% for detecting placental malaria infection (McNemar's X(2)> 3.84). RDTs were not superior to microscopy in detecting placental infection (McNemar's X(2)< 3.84). Presence of malaria in pregnancy and active placental malaria infection were 38% and 12% respectively. Placental infections were associated with poor pregnancy outcome [pre-term, still birth and low birth weight] (aOR = 37.9) and late pregnancy malaria infection (aOR = 20.9). Mosquito net use (aOR 2.1) and increasing parity (aOR 2.7) were associated with lower risk for malaria in pregnancy.ConclusionUse of HRP-2 RDTs to detect malaria in pregnancy in symptomatic women was accurate when performed by midwives. A combination of RDTs and microscopy provided the best means of detecting placental malaria. RDTs were not superior to microscopy in detecting placental infection. With a high sensitivity and specificity, RDTs could be a useful tool for assessing malaria in pregnancy, with further (cost-) effectiveness studies.

Dataset Information

Diagnostic accuracy and yield of screening tests for atrial fibrillation in the family practice setting: a multicentre cohort study.

Publications

Diagnostic accuracy and yield of screening tests for atrial fibrillation in the family practice setting: a multicentre cohort study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets