21
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Accuracy of methods for detecting an irregular pulse and suspected atrial fibrillation: A systematic review and meta-analysis

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Pulse palpation has been recommended as the first step of screening to detect atrial fibrillation. We aimed to determine and compare the accuracy of different methods for detecting pulse irregularities caused by atrial fibrillation.

          Methods

          We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and LILACS until 16 March 2015. Two reviewers identified eligible studies, extracted data and appraised quality using the QUADAS-2 instrument. Meta-analysis, using the bivariate hierarchical random effects method, determined average operating points for sensitivities, specificities, positive and negative likelihood ratios (PLR, NLR); we constructed summary receiver operating characteristic plots.

          Results

          Twenty-one studies investigated 39 interventions (n = 15,129 pulse assessments) for detecting atrial fibrillation. Compared to 12-lead electrocardiography (ECG) diagnosed atrial fibrillation, blood pressure monitors (BPMs; seven interventions) and non-12-lead ECGs (20 interventions) had the greatest accuracy for detecting pulse irregularities attributable to atrial fibrillation (BPM: sensitivity 0.98 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.92–1.00), specificity 0.92 (95% CI 0.88–0.95), PLR 12.1 (95% CI 8.2–17.8) and NLR 0.02 (95% CI 0.00–0.09); non-12-lead ECG: sensitivity 0.91 (95% CI 0.86–0.94), specificity 0.95 (95% CI 0.92–0.97), PLR 20.1 (95% CI 12–33.7), NLR 0.09 (95% CI 0.06–0.14)). There were similar findings for smartphone applications (six interventions) although these studies were small in size. The sensitivity and specificity of pulse palpation (six interventions) were 0.92 (95% CI 0.85–0.96) and 0.82 (95% CI 0.76–0.88), respectively (PLR 5.2 (95% CI 3.8–7.2), NLR 0.1 (95% CI 0.05–0.18)).

          Conclusions

          BPMs and non-12-lead ECG were most accurate for detecting pulse irregularities caused by atrial fibrillation; other technologies may therefore be pragmatic alternatives to pulse palpation for the first step of atrial fibrillation screening.

          Related collections

          Most cited references8

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Population prevalence, incidence, and predictors of atrial fibrillation in the Renfrew/Paisley study.

          Though atrial fibrillation (AF) is an important cause of cardiovascular morbidity, there are few large epidemiological studies of its prevalence, incidence, and risk factors. The epidemiological features of AF are described in one of the largest population cohorts ever studied. The prevalence and incidence of AF were studied in the Renfrew/Paisley population cohort of 15 406 men and women aged 45-64 years living in the west of Scotland. This cohort was initially screened between 1972 and 1976 and again between 1977 and 1979. Incident hospitalisations with AF in the 20 year period following initial screening were also studied. The population prevalence of AF in this cohort was 6.5 cases/1000 examinations. Prevalence was higher in men and older subjects. In those who were rescreened, the four year incidence of AF was 0.54 cases/1000 person years. Radiological cardiomegaly was the most powerful predictor of new AF (adjusted odds ratio 14.0). During 20 year follow up, 3.5% of this cohort was discharged from hospital with a diagnosis of AF; the rate of incident hospitalisation for AF was 1.9 cases/1000 person years. Radiological cardiomegaly (adjusted odds ratio 1.46) and systolic blood pressure (adjusted odds ratio 2.1 for >/= 169 mm Hg) were independent predictors of this outcome. Data from one of the largest epidemiological studies ever undertaken confirm that AF has a large population prevalence and incidence, even in middle aged people. More important, it was shown that the long term incidence of hospitalisation related to AF is high and that two simple clinical measurements are highly predictive of incident AF. These findings have important implications for the prevention of AF.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Randomised trial of two approaches to screening for atrial fibrillation in UK general practice.

            Atrial fibrillation is a common and treatable cause of stroke that often remains unrecognised. Screening has been suggested but there is very little evidence concerning the uptake of screening in the elderly population at risk, nor of the optimal method of screening in a general practice setting To compare the uptake and effectiveness of two methods of screening for atrial fibrillation in general practice--systematic nurse-led screening and prompted opportunistic case finding. Randomised controlled trial. Patients aged 65 to 100 years (n = 3,001) from four general practices within the MRC general practice framework. Each of the four study practices were selected from one quartile, after ranking all framework practices according to the small area standardised mortality ratio of the geographical area served. Patients were randomised either to nurse-led screening or to prompted opportunistic casefinding. The proportion of patients assessed and the proportion found to have atrial fibrillation were compared. The sensitivity and specificity of clinical assessment of pulse are also reported. Substantially more patients had their pulse assessed through systematic screening by invitation (1,099/1,499 [73%]) than through opportunistic case finding (439/1,502 [29%], difference = 44%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 41% to 47%). Atrial fibrillation was detected in 67 (4.5%) and 19 (1.3%) patients respectively (difference = 3.2%, 95% CI= 2.0 to 4.4). Invitation to nurse-led screening achieved significantly higher assessment rates than case finding in all practices; however, the proportion of patients assessed in the case-finding arm varied markedly between practices (range = 8% to 52%). The number needed to screen to identify one additional patient with atrial fibrillation was 31 (95% CI = 23 to 50). The proportion of screened patients with atrial fibrillation receiving anticoagulation treatment was 25%, although in the majority (53/65 [82%]) atrial fibrillation had been previously recorded somewhere on their medical record. If the nurse used any irregularity of the pulse as the screening criterion, the sensitivity of screening was 91% and the specificity was 74%; sensitivity fell to 54% but specificity increased to 98% if the criterion used was continuous irregularity. Nurse-led screening for atrial fibrillation in UK general practice is both feasible and effective and will identify a substantial number of patients who could benefit from antithrombotic therapy. Although the majority of patients detected at first screening could be identified by careful scrutiny of medical records, review of record summaries was insufficient in the practices involved in this study and screening may be a more cost-effective option.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Comparison of Microlife BP A200 Plus and Omron M6 blood pressure monitors to detect atrial fibrillation in hypertensive patients.

              Self-monitoring home blood pressure (BP) devices are currently recommended for long-term follow-up of hypertension and its management. Some of these devices are integrated with algorithms aimed at detecting atrial fibrillation (AF), which is common essential hypertension. This study was designed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of two widely diffused home BP monitoring devices in detecting AF in an unselected population of outpatients referred to a hypertension clinic because of high BP.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Eur J Prev Cardiol
                Eur J Prev Cardiol
                CPR
                spcpr
                European Journal of Preventive Cardiology
                SAGE Publications (Sage UK: London, England )
                2047-4873
                2047-4881
                13 October 2015
                August 2016
                : 23
                : 12
                : 1330-1338
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Division of Primary Care, University of Nottingham, UK
                [2 ]Division of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Nottingham, UK
                [3 ]Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, University of Oxford, UK
                Author notes
                [*]Jaspal S Taggar, Division of Primary Care, University of Nottingham, Medical School, Queen’s Medical Centre, Nottingham NG7 2UH, UK. Email: Jaspal.taggar@ 123456nottingham.ac.uk
                Article
                10.1177_2047487315611347
                10.1177/2047487315611347
                4952027
                26464292
                5ce1d785-7fbd-4e71-a050-41d28cab693b
                © The European Society of Cardiology 2015

                This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 License ( http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access page( https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).

                History
                : 6 August 2015
                : 22 September 2015
                Categories
                Prevention
                Review

                atrial fibrillation,screening,diagnostic accuracy,irregular pulse

                Comments

                Comment on this article