Key result
Handheld ECG screening for AF is cost-effective, preventing one stroke per ~361 patients screened.
Why the study?
The usefulness and cost-effectiveness of atrial fibrillation screening programmes using handheld ECG devices in a population-wide cohort are debated.
Does atrial fibrillation screening with a handheld ECG machine improve diagnosis and cost-effectiveness compared to no screening in a population-wide cohort?
Does atrial fibrillation screening with a handheld ECG machine improve diagnosis and cost-effectiveness compared to no screening in a population-wide cohort?
Number Needed to Treat: 361
Number Needed to Treat: 361
Population-wide screening for atrial fibrillation using a handheld ECG machine is cost-effective and improves diagnostic yield and clinical outcomes in the general population and older subgroups.
May support handheld ECG AF screening as cost-effective; leaves open need for randomized stroke outcome trials.
AIMS: Overall, 40% of patients with atrial fibrillation are asymptomatic. The usefulness and cost-effectiveness of atrial fibrillation screening programmes are debated. We evaluated whether an atrial fibrillation screening programme with a handheld electrocardiogram (ECG) machine in a population-wide cohort has a high screening yield and is cost-effective. METHODS: We used a Markov-model based modelling analysis on 1000 hypothetical individuals who matched the Belgian Heart Rhythm Week screening programme. Subgroup analyses of subjects ≥65 and ≥75 years old were performed. Screening was performed with one-lead ECG handheld machine Omron® HeartScan HCG-801. RESULTS: In both overall population and subgroups, the use of the screening procedure diagnosed a consistently higher number of diagnosed atrial fibrillation than not screening. In the base-case scenario, the screening procedure resulted in 106.6 more atrial fibrillation patient-years, resulting in three fewer strokes, 10 more life years and five more quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). The number needed-to-screen (NNS) to avoid one stroke was 361. In subjects ≥65 years old, we found 80.8 more atrial fibrillation patient-years, resulting in three fewer strokes, four more life-years and five more QALYs. The NNS to avoid one stroke was 354. Similar results were obtained in subjects ≥75 years old, with a NNS to avoid one stroke of 371. In the overall population, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for any gained QALY showed that the screening procedure was cost-effective in all groups. CONCLUSIONS: In a population-wide screening cohort, the use of a handheld ECG machine to identify subjects with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation was cost-effective in the general population, as well as in subjects ≥65 and subjects ≥75 years old.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Proietti et al. (2019) studied Atrial fibrillation (n=1,000). Handheld ECG machine screening (Omron HeartScan HCG-801) vs. No screening was evaluated on Cost-effectiveness and strokes avoided (NNS 361). Population-wide atrial fibrillation screening using a handheld ECG machine was cost-effective, with a number needed to screen of 361 to avoid one stroke.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: