Is screening for AF worthwhile? Stroke risk in a screened population from the SAFE study

Cluster randomised controlled trial of screening for atrial fibrillation in people aged 70 years and over to reduce stroke: protocol for the pilot study for the SAFER trial

INTRODUCTION

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common arrhythmia associated with 30% of strokes, as well as other cardiovascular disease, dementia and death. AF meets many criteria for screening, but there is limited evidence that AF screening reduces stroke. Consequently, no countries recommend national screening programmes for AF. The Screening for Atrial Fibrillation with ECG to Reduce stroke (SAFER) trial aims to determine whether screening for AF is effective at reducing risk of stroke. The aim of the pilot study is to assess feasibility of the main trial and inform implementation of screening and trial procedures.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

SAFER is planned to be a pragmatic randomised controlled trial (RCT) of over 100 000 participants aged 70 years and over, not on long-term anticoagulation therapy at baseline, with an average follow-up of 5 years. Participants are asked to record four traces every day for 3 weeks on a hand-held single-lead ECG device. Cardiologists remotely confirm episodes of AF identified by the device algorithm, and general practitioners follow-up with anticoagulation as appropriate. The pilot study is a cluster RCT in 36 UK general practices, randomised 2:1 control to intervention, recruiting approximately 12 600 participants. Pilot study outcomes include AF detection rate, anticoagulation uptake and other parameters to incorporate into sample size calculations for the main trial. Questionnaires sent to a sample of participants will assess impact of screening on psychological health. Process evaluation and qualitative studies will underpin implementation of screening during the main trial. An economic evaluation using the pilot data will confirm whether it is plausible that screening might be cost-effective.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The London-Central Research Ethics Committee (19/LO/1597) and Confidentiality Advisory Group (19/CAG/0226) provided ethical approval. Dissemination will be via publications, patient-friendly summaries, reports and engagement with the UK National Screening Committee.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN72104369.

Artificial Intelligence and Atrial Fibrillation

In the context of atrial fibrillation (AF), traditional clinical practices have thus far fallen short in several domains such as identifying patients at risk of incident AF or patients with concomitant undetected paroxysmal AF. Novel approaches leveraging artificial intelligence have the potential to provide new tools to deal with some of these old problems. In this review we focus on the roles of artificial intelligence-enabled ECG pertaining to AF, potential roles of deep learning (DL) models in the context of current knowledge gaps, as well as limitations of these models. One key area where DL models can translate to better patient outcomes is through automated ECG interpretation. Further, we overview some of the challenges facing AF screening and the harms and benefits of screening. In this context, a unique model was developed to detect underlying hidden AF from sinus rhythm and is discussed in detail with its potential uses. Knowledge gaps also remain regarding the best ways to monitor patients with embolic stroke of undetermined source (ESUS) and who would benefit most from oral anticoagulation. The AI-enabled AF model is one potential way to tackle this complex problem as it could be used to identify a subset of high-risk ESUS patients likely to benefit from empirical oral anticoagulation. Role of DL models assessing AF burden from long duration ECG data is also discussed as a way of guiding management. There is a trend towards the use of consumer-grade wristbands and watches to detect AF from photoplethysmography data. However, ECG currently remains the gold standard to detect arrythmias including AF. Lastly, role of adequate external validation of the models and clinical trials to study true performance is discussed. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Screening for Atrial Fibrillation: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force

IMPORTANCE

Atrial fibrillation (AF), the most common arrhythmia, increases the risk of stroke.

OBJECTIVE

To review the evidence on screening for AF in adults without prior stroke to inform the US Preventive Services Task Force.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Cochrane Library, and trial registries through October 5, 2020; references, experts, and literature surveillance through October 31, 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of screening among asymptomatic persons without known AF or prior stroke; test accuracy studies; RCTs of anticoagulation among persons with AF; systematic reviews; and observational studies reporting harms.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two reviewers assessed titles/abstracts, full-text articles, and study quality and extracted data; when at least 3 similar studies were available, meta-analyses were conducted.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Detection of undiagnosed AF, test accuracy, mortality, stroke, stroke-related morbidity, and harms.

RESULTS

Twenty-six studies (N = 113 784) were included. In 1 RCT (n = 28 768) of twice-daily electrocardiography (ECG) screening for 2 weeks, the likelihood of a composite end point (ischemic stroke, hemorrhagic stroke, systemic embolism, all-cause mortality, and hospitalization for bleeding) was lower in the screened group over 6.9 years (hazard ratio, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.92-1.00]; P = .045), but that study had numerous limitations. In 4 RCTs (n = 32 491), significantly more AF was detected with intermittent and continuous ECG screening compared with no screening (risk difference range, 1.0%-4.8%). Treatment with warfarin over a mean of 1.5 years in populations with clinical, mostly persistent AF was associated with fewer ischemic strokes (pooled risk ratio [RR], 0.32 [95% CI, 0.20-0.51]; 5 RCTs; n = 2415) and lower all-cause mortality (pooled RR, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.50-0.93]) compared with placebo. Treatment with direct oral anticoagulants was also associated with lower incidence of stroke (adjusted odds ratios range, 0.32-0.44) in indirect comparisons with placebo. The pooled RR for major bleeding for warfarin compared with placebo was 1.8 (95% CI, 0.85-3.7; 5 RCTs; n = 2415), and the adjusted odds ratio for major bleeding for direct oral anticoagulants compared with placebo or no treatment ranged from 1.38 to 2.21, but CIs did not exclude a null effect.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Although screening can detect more cases of unknown AF, evidence regarding effects on health outcomes is limited. Anticoagulation was associated with lower risk of first stroke and mortality but with increased risk of major bleeding, although estimates for this harm are imprecise; no trials assessed benefits and harms of anticoagulation among screen-detected populations.

Screening for atrial fibrillation: a call for evidence

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia and prevalence is predicted to double over the next 30 years due to changing demographics and the rise in prevalence of risk factors such as hypertension and diabetes. Atrial fibrillation is associated with a five-fold increased stroke risk, but anticoagulation in eligible patients can reduce this risk by around 65%. Many people with AF currently go undetected and therefore untreated, either because they are asymptomatic or because they have paroxysmal AF. Screening has been suggested as one approach to increase AF detection rates and reduce the incidence of ischaemic stroke by earlier initiation of anticoagulation therapy. However, international taskforces currently recommend against screening, citing the cost implications and uncertainty over the benefits of a systematic screening programme compared to usual care. A number of large randomized controlled trials have commenced to determine the cost-effectiveness and clinical benefit of screening using a range of devices and across different populations. The recent AppleWatch study demonstrates how advances in technology are providing the public with self-screening devices that are increasingly affordable and accessible. Health care professionals should be aware of the implications of these emerging data for diagnostic pathways and treatment. This review provides an overview of the gaps in the current evidence and a summary of the arguments for and against screening.

Performance of seven ECG interpretation programs in identifying arrhythmia and acute cardiovascular syndrome

BACKGROUND

No direct comparison of current electrocardiogram (ECG) interpretation programs exists.

OBJECTIVE

Assess the accuracy of ECG interpretation programs in detecting abnormal rhythms and flagging for priority review records with alterations secondary to acute coronary syndrome (ACS).

METHODS

More than 2,000 digital ECGs from hospitals and databases in Europe, USA, and Australia, were obtained from consecutive adult and pediatric patients and converted to 10 s analog samples that were replayed on seven electrocardiographs and classified by the manufacturers' interpretation programs. We assessed ability to distinguish sinus rhythm from non-sinus rhythm, identify atrial fibrillation/flutter and other abnormal rhythms, and accuracy in flagging results for priority review. If all seven programs' interpretation statements did not agree, cases were reviewed by experienced cardiologists.

RESULTS

All programs could distinguish well between sinus and non-sinus rhythms and could identify atrial fibrillation/flutter or other abnormal rhythms. However, false-positive rates varied from 2.1% to 5.5% for non-sinus rhythm, from 0.7% to 4.4% for atrial fibrillation/flutter, and from 1.5% to 3.0% for other abnormal rhythms. False-negative rates varied from 12.0% to 7.5%, 9.9% to 2.7%, and 55.9% to 30.5%, respectively. Flagging of ACS varied by a factor of 2.5 between programs. Physicians flagged more ECGs for prompt review, but also showed variance of around a factor of 2. False-negative values differed between programs by a factor of 2 but was high for all (>50%). Agreement between programs and majority reviewer decisions was 46-62%.

CONCLUSIONS

Automatic interpretations of rhythms and ACS differ between programs. Healthcare institutions should not rely on ECG software "critical result" flags alone to decide the ACS workflow.

Mobile Photoplethysmographic Technology to Detect Atrial Fibrillation

BACKGROUND

Low detection and nonadherence are major problems in current management approaches for patients with suspected atrial fibrillation (AF). Mobile health devices may enable earlier AF detection and improved AF management.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to investigate the effectiveness of AF screening in a large population-based cohort using smart device-based photoplethysmography (PPG) technology, combined with a clinical care AF management pathway using a mobile health approach.

METHODS

AF screening was performed with smart devices using PPG technology, which were made available for the population ≥18 years of age across China. Monitoring for at least 14 days with a wristband (Honor Band 4) or wristwatch (Huawei Watch GT, Honor Watch, Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd., Shenzhen, China) was allowed. The patients with "possible AF" episodes using the PPG algorithm were further confirmed by health providers among the MAFA (mobile AF app) Telecare center and network hospitals, with clinical evaluation, electrocardiogram, or 24-h Holter monitoring.

RESULTS

There were 246,541 individuals who downloaded the PPG screening app, and 187,912 individuals used smart devices to monitor their pulse rhythm between October 26, 2018, and May 20, 2019. Among those with PPG monitoring (mean age 35 years, 86.7% male), 424 (of 187,912, 0.23%) (mean age 54 years, 87.0% male) received a "suspected AF" notification. Of those effectively followed up, 227 individuals (of 262, 87.0%) were confirmed as having AF, with the positive predictive value of PPG signals being 91.6% (95% confidential interval [CI]: 91.5% to 91.8%). Both suspected AF and identified AF markedly increased with age (p for trend <0.001), and individuals in Northeast China had the highest proportion of detected AF of 0.28% (95% CI: 0.20% to 0.39%). Of the individuals with identified AF, 216 (of 227, 95.1%) subsequently entered a program of integrated AF management using a mobile AF application; approximately 80% of high-risk patients were successfully anticoagulated.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the present study, continuous home monitoring with smart device-based PPG technology could be a feasible approach for AF screening. This would help efforts at screening and detection of AF, as well as early interventions to reduce stroke and other AF-related complications. (Mobile Health [mHealth] Technology for Improved Screening, Patient Involvement and Optimizing Integrated Care in Atrial Fibrillation [MAFA II]; ChiCTR-OOC-17014138).

Opportunistic Screening for Atrial Fibrillation in the Pharmacies: A Population-Based Cross-Sectional Study

INTRODUCTION

Opportunistic screening of atrial fibrillation is a valuable approach to the identification of subjects with unknown or non-symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF) with the potential of reducing the burden of ischemic stroke in the population.

AIM

To evaluate the feasibility of a large-scale screening for atrial fibrillation using a blood pressure monitor (MicrolifeAFIB) endowed with a validated algorithm able to detect AF calculating the irregularity of interval times between heartbeats.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study conducted in 74 pharmacies in Verona participated 3071 people aged 50 years or more. In 6 months, information about drugs, previous diagnoses of cardiovascular diseases, anthropometric and demographic data was recorded, together with the measurement of blood pressure and cardiac rhythm by using the MicrolifeAFIB device. Pharmacists also collected anthropometric and demographic data of the participants, along with information concerning their personal history of cardiovascular disease and the use of antihypertensive and antithrombotic agents. All those who were positive at the screening for atrial fibrillation were referred to their family doctor.

RESULTS

The screening revealed 98 subjects (3.2%) positive for AF; 44 of these reported a previous diagnosis of AF and were treated with anticoagulants (77%) or with antiplatelet agents (7%). By logistic regression analysis, age, male sex and heart failure were independently associated with positivity for AF. Association between positive test and previous stroke/TIA was found in the 54 subjects without a previous diagnosis of AF (9% had a previous stroke/TIA).

CONCLUSIONS

Opportunistic screening for atrial fibrillation in the pharmacies is feasible and allows to identify a number of subjects with silent, non-previously diagnosed AF, therefore is potentially useful in large-scale projects aimed at the prevention of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.

Screening for Atrial Fibrillation With Electrocardiography: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

IMPORTANCE

Atrial fibrillation is the most common type of cardiac arrhythmia (irregular heartbeat), and its prevalence increases with age, affecting about 3% of men and 2% of women aged 65 to 69 years and about 10% of adults 85 years and older. Atrial fibrillation is a major risk factor for ischemic stroke, increasing risk of stroke by as much as 5-fold. Approximately 20% of patients who have a stroke associated with atrial fibrillation are first diagnosed with atrial fibrillation at the time of stroke or shortly thereafter.

OBJECTIVE

To issue a new US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on screening for atrial fibrillation with electrocardiography (ECG).

EVIDENCE REVIEW

The USPSTF reviewed the evidence on the benefits and harms of screening for atrial fibrillation with ECG in adults 65 years and older, the effectiveness of screening with ECG for detecting previously undiagnosed atrial fibrillation compared with usual care, and the benefits and harms of anticoagulant or antiplatelet therapy for the treatment of screen-detected atrial fibrillation in older adults.

FINDINGS

Most older adults with previously undiagnosed atrial fibrillation have a stroke risk above the threshold for anticoagulant therapy and would be eligible for treatment. Anticoagulant therapy is effective for stroke prevention in symptomatic persons with atrial fibrillation and high stroke risk. However, the USPSTF found inadequate evidence to determine whether screening with ECG and subsequent treatment in asymptomatic adults is more effective than usual care. At the same time, the harms of diagnostic follow-up and treatment prompted by abnormal ECG results are well established and include misdiagnosis and invasive testing. Given these uncertainties, it is not possible to determine the net benefit of screening with ECG.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION

The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for atrial fibrillation with ECG. (I statement).

Screening for Atrial Fibrillation With Electrocardiography: Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force

IMPORTANCE

Atrial fibrillation is the most common arrhythmia and increases the risk of stroke.

OBJECTIVE

To review the evidence on screening for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation with electrocardiography (ECG) and stroke prevention treatment in asymptomatic adults 65 years or older to inform the US Preventive Services Task Force.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and trial registries through May 2017; references; experts; literature surveillance through June 6, 2018.

STUDY SELECTION

English-language randomized clinical trials (RCTs), prospective cohort studies evaluating detection rates of atrial fibrillation or harms of screening, and systematic reviews evaluating stroke prevention treatment. Eligible treatment studies compared warfarin, aspirin, or novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) with placebo or no treatment. Studies were excluded that focused on persons with a history of cardiovascular disease.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Dual review of abstracts, full-text articles, and study quality. When at least 3 similar studies were available, random-effects meta-analyses were conducted.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Detection of previously undiagnosed atrial fibrillation, mortality, stroke, stroke-related morbidity, and harms.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies were included (n = 135 300). No studies evaluated screening compared with no screening and focused on health outcomes. Systematic screening with ECG identified more new cases of atrial fibrillation than no screening (absolute increase, from 0.6% [95% CI, 0.1%-0.9%] to 2.8% [95% CI, 0.9%-4.7%] over 12 months; 2 RCTs, n = 15 803), but a systematic approach using ECG did not detect more cases than an approach using pulse palpation (2 RCTs, n = 17 803). For potential harms, no eligible studies compared screening with no screening. Warfarin (mean, 1.5 years) was associated with a reduced risk of ischemic stroke (relative risk [RR], 0.32 [95% CI, 0.20-0.51]) and all-cause mortality (RR, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.50-0.93]) and with increased risk of bleeding (5 trials, n = 2415). Participants in treatment trials were not screen detected, and most had long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation. A network meta-analysis reported that NOACs were associated with a significantly lower risk of a composite outcome of stroke and systemic embolism (adjusted odds ratios compared with placebo or control ranged from 0.32-0.44); the risk of bleeding was increased (adjusted odds ratios, 1.4-2.2), but confidence intervals were wide and differences between groups were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Although screening with ECG can detect previously unknown cases of atrial fibrillation, it has not been shown to detect more cases than screening focused on pulse palpation. Treatments for atrial fibrillation reduce the risk of stroke and all-cause mortality and increase the risk of bleeding, but trials have not assessed whether treatment of screen-detected asymptomatic older adults results in better health outcomes than treatment after detection by usual care or after symptoms develop.

Screening of older patients for atrial fibrillation in general practice: Current evidence and its implications for future practice

Background: Individuals with atrial fibrillation (AF) face a fivefold increased risk of ischaemic stroke compared with those without the condition. Recent studies suggest that individuals with asymptomatic AF also face an increased risk of ischaemic stroke, but their condition is often not recognized and diagnosed until an ischaemic stroke event has occurred. Identification of individuals with undiagnosed AF at increased risk for stroke is critical in promoting optimal intervention with anticoagulants.

Objectives: In this narrative review, we consider the benefits and limitations of various proposed screening strategies, whether single or multiple time-points, in addition to devices for implementation in the primary care setting.

Outcomes: Opportunistic screening via pulse palpation with subsequent referral for 12-lead electrocardiogram testing has been shown to cost-effectively identify individuals with asymptomatic AF. Some handheld devices suitable for use in primary care settings are now available and may facilitate screening of large cohorts of individuals considered to be at increased risk of AF, such as those aged ≥65 years or those diagnosed with or undergoing monitoring for hypertension.

Conclusions: It was determined that improved detection and diagnosis of AF, combined with appropriate anticoagulation strategies, will be crucial for improving stroke prevention and reducing its associated social and economic costs.

Screening strategies for atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis

Background

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common cardiac arrhythmia that increases the risk of thromboembolic events. Anticoagulation therapy to prevent AF-related stroke has been shown to be cost-effective. A national screening programme for AF may prevent AF-related events, but would involve a substantial investment of NHS resources.

Objectives

To conduct a systematic review of the diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) of screening tests for AF, update a systematic review of comparative studies evaluating screening strategies for AF, develop an economic model to compare the cost-effectiveness of different screening strategies and review observational studies of AF screening to provide inputs to the model.

Design

Systematic review, meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis.

Setting

Primary care.

Participants

Adults.

Intervention

Screening strategies, defined by screening test, age at initial and final screens, screening interval and format of screening {systematic opportunistic screening [individuals offered screening if they consult with their general practitioner (GP)] or systematic population screening (when all eligible individuals are invited to screening)}.

Main outcome measures

Sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic odds ratios; the odds ratio of detecting new AF cases compared with no screening; and the mean incremental net benefit compared with no screening.

Review methods

Two reviewers screened the search results, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. A DTA meta-analysis was perfomed, and a decision tree and Markov model was used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the screening strategies.

Results

Diagnostic test accuracy depended on the screening test and how it was interpreted. In general, the screening tests identified in our review had high sensitivity (> 0.9). Systematic population and systematic opportunistic screening strategies were found to be similarly effective, with an estimated 170 individuals needed to be screened to detect one additional AF case compared with no screening. Systematic opportunistic screening was more likely to be cost-effective than systematic population screening, as long as the uptake of opportunistic screening observed in randomised controlled trials translates to practice. Modified blood pressure monitors, photoplethysmography or nurse pulse palpation were more likely to be cost-effective than other screening tests. A screening strategy with an initial screening age of 65 years and repeated screens every 5 years until age 80 years was likely to be cost-effective, provided that compliance with treatment does not decline with increasing age.

Conclusions

A national screening programme for AF is likely to represent a cost-effective use of resources. Systematic opportunistic screening is more likely to be cost-effective than systematic population screening. Nurse pulse palpation or modified blood pressure monitors would be appropriate screening tests, with confirmation by diagnostic 12-lead electrocardiography interpreted by a trained GP, with referral to a specialist in the case of an unclear diagnosis. Implementation strategies to operationalise uptake of systematic opportunistic screening in primary care should accompany any screening recommendations.

Limitations

Many inputs for the economic model relied on a single trial [the Screening for Atrial Fibrillation in the Elderly (SAFE) study] and DTA results were based on a few studies at high risk of bias/of low applicability.

Future work

Comparative studies measuring long-term outcomes of screening strategies and DTA studies for new, emerging technologies and to replicate the results for photoplethysmography and GP interpretation of 12-lead electrocardiography in a screening population.

Study registration

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42014013739.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Yield of screening for atrial fibrillation in primary care with a hand-held, single-lead electrocardiogram device during influenza vaccination

AIMS

To assess the yield of screening for atrial fibrillation (AF) with a hand-held single-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) device during influenza vaccination in primary care in the Netherlands.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We used the MyDiagnostick to screen for AF in persons who participated in influenza vaccination sessions of ten Dutch primary care practices. In case of suspected AF detection by the stick, the recorded 1-min ECG registrations were analysed by a cardiologist. We scrutinized electronic medical files of the general practitioners to obtain information about the cases screened. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to predict the relation between patient characteristics and a new screen-detected diagnosis of AF. In total, 3269 persons were screened for AF during the influenza vaccination sessions of 10 general practitioner practices. As a result, 37 (1.1%) new cases of AF were detected. Prior transient ischeamic attack or stroke (OR 6.05; 95%CI 1.93-19.0), and age (OR 1.09 per year; 95% CI 1.05-1.14) were independent predictors for such newly screen-detected AF. Of the 37 screen-detected AF cases, 2.7% had a CHA₂DS₂-VASc of 0, 18.9% a score of 1, and 78.4% a score of 2 or more. The majority needed oral anticoagulant therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Screening seems feasible with an easy to use single-lead, hand-held ECG device with automatic AF detection during influenza vaccination in primary care and results in a '1-day' yield of 1.1% new cases of AF.

TRIAL REGISTRATION CLINICALTRIALSGOV

NCT02006524.

European Primary Care Cardiovascular Society (EPCCS) consensus guidance on stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (SPAF) in primary care

Background

Atrial fibrillation affects 1–2% of the general population and 10% of those over 75, and is responsible for around a quarter of all strokes. These strokes are largely preventable by the use of anticoagulation therapy, although many eligible patients are not treated. Recent large clinical trials have added to the evidence base on stroke prevention and international clinical guidelines have been updated.

Design

Consensus practical recommendations from primary care physicians with an interest in vascular disease and vascular specialists.

Methods

A focussed all-day meeting, with presentation of summary evidence under each section of this guidance and review of European guidelines on stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation, was used to generate a draft document, which then underwent three cycles of revision and debate before all panel members agreed with the consensus statements.

Results

Six areas were identified that included how to identify patients with atrial fibrillation, how to determine their stroke risk and whether to recommend modification of this risk, and what management options are available, with practical recommendations on maximising benefit and minimising risk if anticoagulation is recommended and the reasons why antiplatelet therapy is no longer recommended. The summary evidence is presented for each area and simple summary recommendations are highlighted, with areas of remaining uncertainty listed.

Conclusions

Atrial fibrillation-related stroke is a major public health priority for most health systems. This practical guidance can assist generalist community physicians to translate the large evidence base for this cause of preventable stroke and implement this at a local level.