Why the study?
The study was conducted to improve AF awareness and detection, and to assess the performance of the Microlife WatchBP Home A device for detecting AF during community screening.
Does community-based opportunistic screening using the Microlife WatchBP Home A device accurately detect atrial fibrillation in people aged ≥ 65 years?
Does community-based opportunistic screening using the Microlife WatchBP Home A device accurately detect atrial fibrillation in people aged ≥ 65 years?
Community-based opportunistic screening for atrial fibrillation using the Microlife WatchBP Home A device yielded a low positive predictive value (46.8%), suggesting it is unlikely to be a cost-effective screening strategy.
Community AF screening with WatchBP appears feasible in older adults; leaves open whether device performance warrants routine adoption without randomized validation.
A community-based opportunistic screening program was implemented to (i) improve atrial fibrillation (AF) awareness and detection and (ii) assess the performance of the Microlife WatchBP Home A for detecting AF when used in community screening. Screening sessions were conducted among people aged ≥ 65 years with no history of AF at public events across Tasmania, Australia. Participants with positive screening results were referred to their general medical practitioner for assessment. The device's performance was assessed using the positive predictive value. A total of 1704 eligible participants were screened at 79 sessions. Of these people, 50 (2.9%) had a positive screening result. The device correctly identified AF in 22 (46.8%) participants with positive results. Among those with subsequently confirmed AF, 6 (27.3%) had a history of AF but were not aware of the diagnosis, and 16 (72.7%) were identified to have previously undiagnosed AF, with an overall prevalence of 0.9% (95% CI, 0.58 to 1.52). Oral anticoagulation therapy was initiated in 12 (87.5%) eligible participants. The positive predictive value of the device was 46.8% (95% CI, 33.3 to 60.7). Given the relatively low performance of the device, its application in community-based opportunistic screening programs for AF is unlikely to be cost-effective.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jatau et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: