Key result
Self-pulse palpation for the detection of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation yielded a low sensitivity of 56% and a positive predictive value of 7%, resulting in approximately 13 false alerts for each correctly detected irregular pulse.
Why the study?
Does self-palpation improve the detection of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation and subsequent treatment decisions or outcomes?
Does self-palpation improve the detection of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation and subsequent treatment decisions or outcomes?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This editorial discusses the utility and potential limitations ('much noise with little signal') of self-palpation for detecting paroxysmal atrial fibrillation.
No abstract yet. The journal hasn't published one we can show.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rahimi et al. (2020) conducted an editorial in Atrial fibrillation (n=1,000). Self-pulse palpation vs. Simultaneously recorded ECGs was evaluated on Sensitivity for diagnosis of atrial fibrillation at the individual level (Sensitivity 56%, 95% CI 35%-75%). Self-pulse palpation for the detection of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation yielded a low sensitivity of 56% and a positive predictive value of 7%, resulting in approximately 13 false alerts for each correctly detected irregular pulse.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: