Response to: ’Screening for atrial fibrillation in hospitalised geriatric patients' by Tavernier et al

Screening for Atrial Fibrillation Using Economical and Accurate Technology (From the SAFETY Study)

The prevalence of atrial fibrillation (AF) is estimated at more than 3% in the adult population and there has been increased interest in screening for AF. In the SAFETY trial we chose to evaluate if inexpensive, wearable, consumer electrocardiography (ECG) sensing devices (Polar-H7 [PH7] and Firstbeat Bodyguard 2 [BG2]), could be used to detect AF accurately. We undertook a case-control study of 418 participants aged >65 (82 with AF and/or flutter at the study visit and 336 without) attending 3 general practice surgeries in Hampshire, UK for a single screening visit. The PH7 and BG2 devices were tested alongside 2 established AF detection devices (AliveCor and WatchBP) in random order and the diagnosis of AF was confirmed by 12-Lead ECG interpreted by a panel of cardiologists. The sensitivity (95% confidence interval [CI] range), specificity (95% CI range), and overall accuracy (95% CI range) of the 4 devices were: AliveCor: 87.8% (78.7% to 94.0%), 98.8% (97.0% to 99.7%), 96.7% (94.4% to 98.2%); WatchBP: 96.3% (89.7% to 99.2%), 93.5% (90.3% to 95.9%), 94.0% (91.3% to 96.1%): PH7: 96.3% (89.7% to 99.2%), 98.2% (96.2% to 99.3%), 97.9% (96.0% to 99.0%). BG2: 96.3% (89.7% to 99.2%), 98.5% (96.6% to 99.5%), 98.1% (96.3% to 99.2%). The PH7 and BG2 devices were highly reliable (the devices acquired sufficient data and obtained a diagnostic result in all but 1 participant on the first attempt). In conclusion, inexpensive, consumer heart rate monitoring devices (PH7 and BG2) can be used to detect AF accurately with sensitivity and specificity >95%. The consumer devices performed as well or better than WatchBP and AliveCor and have the capability to store or transmit ECG data which could be used to confirm AF.