Pooled yield of screening was greater in males across all age strata .
Neither the choice of screening methodology or device , the geographical region , nor the screening setting influenced the detection rate of AF .
The main limitation of this study is there are insufficient data on sociodemographic variables of the population s and possible ascertainment biases to explain the variance in the sample s. CONCLUSIONS People with screen-detected AF are at elevated calculated stroke risk : above age 65 , the majority have a Class-1 OAC recommendation for stroke prevention , and > 70 % have ≥1 additional stroke risk factor other than age/sex .
BACKGROUND The precise age distribution and calculated stroke risk of screen-detected atrial fibrillation ( AF ) is not known .
Therefore , it is not possible to determine the number needed to screen ( NNS ) to identify one treatable new AF case ( NNS-Rx ) ( i.e. , Class-1 oral anticoagulation [ OAC ] treatment recommendation ) in each age stratum .
If the NNS-Rx is known for each age stratum , precise cost-effectiveness and sensitivity simulations can be performed based on the age distribution of the population /region to be screened .
Such calculations are required by national authorities and organisations responsible for health system budgets to determine the best age cutoffs for screening programs and decide whether programs of screening should be funded .
Therefore , we aim ed to determine the exact yield and calculated stroke-risk profile of screen-detected AF and NNS-Rx in 5-year age strata .
Diagnostic accuracy and yield of screening tests for atrial fibrillation in the family practice setting: a multicentre cohort study.
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 prospect i ve 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 Clinical Trials.gov , no. NCT02262351
Pooled yield of screening was greater in males across all age strata .
Neither the choice of screening methodology or device , the geographical region , nor the screening setting influenced the detection rate of AF .
The main limitation of this study is there are insufficient data on sociodemographic variables of the population s and possible ascertainment biases to explain the variance in the sample s. CONCLUSIONS People with screen-detected AF are at elevated calculated stroke risk : above age 65 , the majority have a Class-1 OAC recommendation for stroke prevention , and > 70 % have ≥1 additional stroke risk factor other than age/sex .
BACKGROUND The precise age distribution and calculated stroke risk of screen-detected atrial fibrillation ( AF ) is not known .
Therefore , it is not possible to determine the number needed to screen ( NNS ) to identify one treatable new AF case ( NNS-Rx ) ( i.e. , Class-1 oral anticoagulation [ OAC ] treatment recommendation ) in each age stratum .
If the NNS-Rx is known for each age stratum , precise cost-effectiveness and sensitivity simulations can be performed based on the age distribution of the population /region to be screened .
Such calculations are required by national authorities and organisations responsible for health system budgets to determine the best age cutoffs for screening programs and decide whether programs of screening should be funded .
Therefore , we aim ed to determine the exact yield and calculated stroke-risk profile of screen-detected AF and NNS-Rx in 5-year age strata .