Screening for atrial fibrillation in the community: A multicenter validation trial

Education of Self-Radial Pulse Palpation and Atrial Fibrillation Signs and Symptoms

The purpose of this evidence-based education initiative was to increase A Fib detection in a cardiovascular diseased population in which participants were taught radial pulse palpation and signs/symptoms of A Fib. Participants were evaluated after initial education on performance of radial pulse palpation and teach back of signs/symptoms of the arrhythmia and again at three weeks on adherence to daily self-screening and recall of signs/symptoms of A Fib. Post initial education, 88% of eligible participants learned pulse-palpation and 93% could verbalize at minimum one sign/symptom. After three weeks, 94.7% reported daily self-screening, but only 44.7% could verbalize at minimum one sign/symptom. This indicated that participants were continuing to self-screen, but in need of booster education sessions. Educating individuals on self-screening and signs/symptoms of A Fib is clinically feasible.

A self-management support intervention for patients with atrial fibrillation: a randomized controlled pilot trial

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia worldwide. Despite effective treatment, it is characterized by frequent recurrences. Optimal therapeutic management of AF requires active participation and self-management from patients. Two major components of self-management are self-monitoring and sign-and-symptom management. Pulse self-palpation (PSP) is a method of self-monitoring; however, not all AF patients are capable of successfully performing PSP. Due to a lack of interventions on this topic, a nurse-led intervention for patients with AF (PSPAF intervention) was developed to foster self-monitoring and to enhance self-management through PSP. The purpose of this pilot study was to test the acceptability, feasibility, and potential effects of this intervention on the capability of patients' PSP and sign-and-symptom management. Moreover, we aimed at gathering data on the feasibility of applied research methods to aid in the design of future studies.

METHODS

The pilot trial involved 20 adult patients with AF, randomized to an intervention or usual care group. At baseline and during a home visit 3-5 weeks later, we collected data using questionnaires, checklists, field notes, a mobile ECG device, and a diary. Acceptability and feasibility measures were validated through predefined cut-off points. Effect size estimates were expressed as relative risks (RR) and the number needed to treat (NNT).

RESULTS

The PSPAF intervention seemed feasible, but only partly acceptable. There were limitations in terms of potential effectiveness, suitability, addressing participants' willingness to implement its content in daily life, and adherence. Estimations of effect sizes suggest a large effect of the intervention on patients' PSP capability (RR = 6.0; 95% CI = [0.83, 43.3]; NNT = 2.4), but almost no effect on sign-and-symptom management (RR = 1.5; 95% CI = [0.7, 3.1]; NNT = 4.0). The feasibility of applied research methods showed minor limitations on recruitment and participant burden.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite some limitations, the intervention seemed to be applicable and promising. Taking into account the suggestions and amendments we have made, we recommend conducting a full-scale trial to examine the efficacy of the PSPAF intervention.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This pilot study was registered in the German Clinical Trials Register at September 4, 2017 (Main ID: DRKS00012808).

"As Needed" nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants for infrequent atrial fibrillation episodes following atrial fibrillation ablation guided by diligent pulse monitoring: A feasibility study

INTRODUCTION

After atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation, oral anticoagulation (OAC) is recommended if stroke risk as assessed by CHA₂ DS ₂ -VASc score is high. However, patients without AF are often reluctant to take daily OAC. We describe outcome using as needed nonvitamin K antagonist (NOACs) guided by pulse monitoring to detect AF following successful ablation.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We identified 99 patients (84% male, age 64 ± 8 years), CHA₂ DS ₂ -VASc score greater than or equal to 1 in men and greater than or equal to 2 in women (median 2, range 1-6), capable of pulse assessment twice daily and no AF on extended monitoring after AF ablation. All patients were instructed to start NOAC if AF >1 hour or recurrent shorter episodes. Duration of NOAC use after restart was typically 2 to 4 weeks. After 30 ± 14 months (total 244 patient-years), 22 patients (22%) transitioned to daily NOAC because of noncompliance with pulse assessment or patient preference (six patients) or because of suspected or documented AF episode(s) in 16 (16%) patients. Of the remaining 77 (78%), 14 (14%) used NOACs but did not transition back to daily use, most (10 patients) with single use (seven patients) or non-AF rhythm (three patients) documented. There was only one thromboembolic event (0.4%/yr of follow-up) in patient without AF and one mild bleeding event (epistaxis).

CONCLUSION

The use of as needed NOACs when AF is suspected with pulse monitoring is effective and safe to maintain low risk of stroke and bleeding after successful ablation. Transition back to daily NOAC use should be anticipated in about one quarter of patients.

Self-detection of atrial fibrillation in an aged population: three-year follow-up of the LietoAF intervention study

Background

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is often asymptomatic and undiagnosed until an ischaemic stroke occurs. An irregular pulse is a key manifestation of AF. We assessed whether pulse self-palpation is feasible in screening of AF.

Methods

Altogether 205 residents of Lieto municipality aged ≥75 years were randomized in 2012 to receive brief education on pulse palpation focusing on evaluating rhythm regularity. Self-detected pulse irregularity and new AF diagnoses were recorded, and the subjects’ quality of life and use of health care services were assessed during a three-year follow-up.

Results

The subjects’ median age was 78.2 [3.8] years, and 89 (43.4%) were men. Overall, 139 (68%) subjects had initial good motivation/capability for regular palpation. At four months, 112 (80.6%) subjects with good and 26 (39.4%) with inadequate motivation/capability palpated their pulse daily. At 12 months, 120 (58.5%) and at 36 months, 69 (33.7%) subjects palpated their pulse at least weekly. During the intervention, 67 (32.7%) subjects reported pulse irregularity. New AF was found in 10 (4.9%) subjects, 7 (70%) of whom had reported pulse irregularity. Pulse irregularity independently predicted new AF, but only one (0.5%) subject with new AF sought undelayed medical attention due to pulse irregularity. Quality of life and number of outpatient clinic visits remained unchanged during follow-up.

Conclusion

Pulse palpation can be learned also by the elderly, but it is challenging to form a continuing habit. The low persistence of pulse self-palpation limits its value in the screening of AF, and strategies to promote persistence and research on alternative screening methods are needed.

Trial registration

http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01721005. The trial was registered retrospectively on October 26, 2012.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12877-017-0607-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Reliability of pulse palpation in the detection of atrial fibrillation in an elderly population

PURPOSE

Atrial fibrillation (AF) may first present as an ischemic stroke. Pulse palpation is a potential screening method for asymptomatic AF. We aimed to assess the reliability of pulse palpation by the elderly in detecting AF.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

After brief information and training session conducted by a nurse, 173 subjects aged ≥75 years were instructed to palpate their pulse regularly for a month. After this, their ability to distinguish sinus rhythm (SR), SR with premature ventricular contractions (PVC) and AF by pulse palpation was assessed using an anatomic human arm model programmable with various rhythms. A control group of 57 healthcare professionals received the same information but not the training. Subjects unable to find the pulse were excluded (25 (14.5%) of the elderly and none in the healthcare group).

RESULTS

The median age of the elderly subjects was 78.4 [3.9] years and 98 (56.6%) were women. There were no differences between the elderly and healthcare groups in detecting SR (97.3% vs. 96.5%) or SR with PVCs (74.3% vs. 71.4%), but the elderly subjects identified slow (81.8% vs. 56.1%) and fast AF (91.9% vs. 80.7%) significantly better than the healthcare group. The ability to recognize SR with PVCs by the elderly was independently predicted by previous pulse palpation experience, secondary or higher level of education and one-point increase in MMSE score, while identifying the other rhythms had no predictors.

CONCLUSIONS

The elderly can learn to reliably distinguish a normal rhythm after education. Pulse self-palpation may be a useful low-cost method to screen for asymptomatic AF.

Systematic screening for the detection of atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation (AF), the most common arrhythmia in clinical practice, is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Screening for AF in asymptomatic patients has been proposed as a way of reducing the burden of the disease by detecting people who would benefit from prophylactic anticoagulation therapy before the onset of symptoms. However, for screening to be an effective intervention, it must improve the detection of AF and provide benefit for those detected earlier as a result of screening.

OBJECTIVES

This review aims to answer the following questions.Does systematic screening increase the detection of AF compared with routine practice? Which combination of screening population, strategy and test is most effective for detecting AF compared with routine practice? What safety issues and adverse events may be associated with individual screening programmes? How acceptable is the intervention to the target population? What costs are associated with systematic screening for AF?

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (Ovid) and EMBASE (Ovid) up to 11 November 2015. We searched other relevant research databases, trials registries and websites up to December 2015. We also searched reference lists of identified studies for potentially relevant studies, and we contacted corresponding authors for information about additional published or unpublished studies that may be relevant. We applied no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing screening for AF with routine practice in people 40 years of age and older were eligible. Two review authors (PM and CT) independently selected trials for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors (PM and CT) independently assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We used odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to present results for the primary outcome, which is a dichotomous variable. As we identified only one study for inclusion, we performed no meta-analysis. We used the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation Working Group) method to assess the quality of the evidence and GRADEPro to create a 'Summary of findings' table.

MAIN RESULTS

One cluster-randomised controlled trial met the inclusion criteria for this review. This study compared systematic screening (by invitation to have an electrocardiogram (ECG)) and opportunistic screening (pulse palpation during a general practitioner (GP) consultation for any reason, followed by an ECG if pulse was irregular) versus routine practice (normal case finding on the basis of clinical presentation) in people 65 years of age or older.Results show that both systematic screening and opportunistic screening of people over 65 years of age are more effective than routine practice (OR 1.57, 95% CI 1.08 to 2.26; and OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.29, respectively; both moderate-quality evidence). We found no difference in the effectiveness of systematic screening and opportunistic screening (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.37; low-quality evidence). A subgroup analysis found that systematic screening and opportunistic screening were more effective in men (OR 2.68, 95% CI 1.51 to 4.76; and OR 2.33, 95% CI 1.29 to 4.19, respectively) than in women (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.62; and OR 1.2, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.93, respectively). No adverse events associated with screening were reported.The incremental cost per additional case detected by opportunistic screening was GBP 337, compared with GBP 1514 for systematic screening. All cost estimates were based on data from the single included trial, which was conducted in the UK between 2001 and 2003.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence suggests that systematic screening and opportunistic screening for AF increase the rate of detection of new cases compared with routine practice. Although these approaches have comparable effects on the overall AF diagnosis rate, the cost of systematic screening is significantly greater than the cost of opportunistic screening from the perspective of the health service provider. Few studies have investigated effects of screening in other health systems and in younger age groups; therefore, caution needs to be exercised in relation to transferability of these results beyond the setting and population in which the included study was conducted.Additional research is needed to examine the effectiveness of alternative screening strategies and to investigate the effects of the intervention on risk of stroke for screened versus non-screened populations.

Effectiveness of systematic screening for the detection of atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia in clinical practice and is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Screening for AF in asymptomatic patients has been proposed as a way of reducing the burden of the disease by detecting people who would benefit from prophylactic anticoagulation therapy prior to the onset of symptoms. However, for screening to be an effective intervention it must improve the detection of AF and provide benefit for those who are detected earlier as a result of screening.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective of this review was to examine whether screening programmes increase the detection of new cases of AF compared to routine practice. The secondary objectives were to identify which combination of screening strategy and patient population is most effective, as well as assessing any safety issues associated with screening, its acceptability within the target population and the costs involved.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) on The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (Ovid) and EMBASE (Ovid) up to March 2012. Other relevant research databases, trials registries and websites were searched up to June 2012. Reference lists of identified studies were also searched for potentially relevant studies and we contacted corresponding authors for information about additional published or unpublished studies that may be relevant. No language restrictions were applied.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials, controlled before and after studies and interrupted time series studies comparing screening for AF with routine practice in people aged 40 years and over were eligible. Two authors (PM, CT or MF) independently selected the trials for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Assessment of risk of bias and data extraction were performed independently by two authors (PM, CT). Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used to present the results for the primary outcome, which is a dichotomous variable. Since only one included study was identified, no meta-analysis was performed.

MAIN RESULTS

One cluster randomised controlled trial met the inclusion criteria for this review. This study compared systematic screening (by invitation to have an electrocardiogram (ECG)) and opportunistic screening (pulse palpation during a general practitioner (GP) consultation for any reason followed by an ECG if pulse was irregular) to routine practice (normal case finding on the basis of clinical presentation) in people aged 65 years or older. The risk of bias in the included study was judged to be low.Both systematic and opportunistic screening of people over the age of 65 years are more effective than routine practice (OR 1.57, 95% CI 1.08 to 2.26 and OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.29, respectively). The number needed to screen in order to detect one additional case compared to routine practice was 172 (95% CI 94 to 927) for systematic screening and 167 (95% CI 92 to 806) for opportunistic screening. Both systematic and opportunistic screening were more effective in men (OR 2.68, 95% CI 1.51 to 4.76 and OR 2.33, 95% CI 1.29 to 4.19, respectively) than in women (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.62 and OR 1.2, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.93, respectively). No data on the effectiveness of screening in different ethnic or socioeconomic groups were available. There were insufficient data to compare the effectiveness of screening programmes in different healthcare settings.Systematic screening was associated with a better overall uptake rate than opportunistic screening (53% versus 46%) except in the ≥ 75 years age group where uptake rates were similar (43% versus 42%). In both screening programmes men were more likely to participate than women (57% versus 50% in systematic screening, 49% versus 41% in opportunistic screening) and younger people (65 to 74 years) were more likely to participate than people aged 75 years and over (61% versus 43% systematic, 49% versus 42% opportunistic). No adverse events associated with screening were reported.The incremental cost per additional case detected by opportunistic screening was GBP 337, compared to GBP 1514 for systematic screening. All cost estimates were based on data from the single included trial, which was conducted in the UK between 2001 and 2003.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Systematic and opportunistic screening for AF increase the rate of detection of new cases compared with routine practice. While both approaches have a comparable effect on the overall AF diagnosis rate, the cost of systematic screening is significantly more than that of opportunistic screening from the perspective of the health service provider. The lack of studies investigating the effect of screening in other health systems and younger age groups means that caution needs to be exercised in relation to the transferability of these results beyond the setting and population in which the included study was conducted.Additional research is needed to examine the effectiveness of alternative screening strategies and to investigate the effect of the intervention on the risk of stroke for screened versus non-screened populations.

A community education program on atrial fibrillation: Implications of pulse self-examination on awareness and behavior

OBJECTIVES

We postulated that community groups with older demographics could be taught to find and characterize their pulse rhythm for the presence of an irregular pulse (IP), which may indicate atrial fibrillation, a major risk factor for stroke.

METHODS

We conducted 281 community group education sessions involving 6203 attendees. Awareness objectives were to demonstrate that: (1) group education was effective in establishing awareness that an IP may indicate atrial fibrillation; and (2) this message was retained at follow-up. Behavioral objectives were to: (1) assess ability of participants to find and characterize their pulse rhythm; (2) regularly monitor pulse rhythm; and (3) act with medical appropriateness upon detecting an IP.

RESULTS

Of 6203 attendees, 4322 were older than 50 years and consented to participate. Of these consenting participants, 73.2% found their radial pulse and 91% characterized the rhythm (regular, 72.1%; irregular, 11%; undetermined, 7.9%). Telephone follow-ups on 1839 participants were performed at 30 to 60 days to assess durability of message and action taken. At follow-up, 89.1% remembered that an IP is potentially a risk factor for stroke, and 70.3% had taken their pulse since the program. Of those who discovered a new IP, 38% sought medical assessment.

CONCLUSION

Community education programs focusing on pulse self-examination are effective in improving awareness that an IP may be a surrogate indicator of stroke risk. Such programs may lead to improved awareness of atrial fibrillation, subsequent behavioral changes, and stroke prevention.