Detection of atrial fibrillation in primary care with radial pulse palpation, electronic blood pressure measurement and handheld single-lead electrocardiography: a diagnostic accuracy study

Author:

Verbiest-van Gurp NicoleORCID,Uittenbogaart Steven B,Lucassen Wim A M,Erkens Petra M G,Knottnerus J André,Winkens Bjorn,Stoffers Henri E J H,van Weert Henk C P M

Abstract

ObjectiveTo determine the diagnostic accuracy of three tests—radial pulse palpation, an electronic blood pressure monitor and a handheld single-lead ECG device—for opportunistic screening for unknown atrial fibrillation (AF).DesignWe performed a diagnostic accuracy study in the intention-to-screen arm of a cluster randomised controlled trial aimed at opportunistic screening for AF in general practice. We performed radial pulse palpation, followed by electronic blood pressure measurement (WatchBP Home A) and handheld ECG (MyDiagnostick) in random order. If one or more index tests were positive, we performed a 12-lead ECG at shortest notice. Similarly, to limit verification bias, a random sample of patients with three negative index tests received this reference test. Additionally, we analysed the dataset using multiple imputation. We present pooled diagnostic parameters.Setting47 general practices participated between September 2015 and August 2018.ParticipantsIn the electronic medical record system of the participating general practices (n=47), we randomly marked 200 patients of ≥65 years without AF. When they visited the practice for any reason, we invited them to participate. Exclusion criteria were terminal illness, inability to give informed consent or visit the practice or having a pacemaker or an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator.OutcomesDiagnostic accuracy of individual tests and test combinations to detect unknown AF.ResultsWe included 4339 patients; 0.8% showed new AF. Sensitivity and specificity were 62.8% (range 43.1%–69.7%) and 91.8% (91.7%–91.8%) for radial pulse palpation, 70.0% (49.0%–80.6%) and 96.5% (96.3%–96.7%) for electronic blood pressure measurement and 90.1% (60.8%–100%) and 97.9% (97.8%–97.9%) for handheld ECG, respectively. Positive predictive values were 5.8% (5.3%–6.1%), 13.8% (12.2%–14.8%) and 25.2% (24.2%–25.8%), respectively. All negative predictive values were ≥99.7%.ConclusionIn detecting AF, electronic blood pressure measurement (WatchBP Home A), but especially handheld ECG (MyDiagnostick) showed better diagnostic accuracy than radial pulse palpation.Trial registration numberNetherlands Trial Register No. NL4776 (old NTR4914).

Funder

MyDiagnostick Medical BV

Boehringer Ingelheim

ZonMw

Amsterdam University Medical Centers

Microlife / Retomed

Publisher

BMJ

Subject

General Medicine

Cited by 4 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3