IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0213198.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effectiveness of screening for atrial fibrillation and its determinants. A meta-analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Pawel Petryszyn
  • Piotr Niewinski
  • Aleksandra Staniak
  • Patryk Piotrowski
  • Anna Well
  • Michal Well
  • Izabela Jeskowiak
  • Gregory Lip
  • Piotr Ponikowski

Abstract

Background: Many atrial fibrillation patients eligible for oral anticoagulants are unaware of the presence of AF, and improved detection is necessary to facilitate thromboprophylaxis against stroke. Objective: To assess the effectiveness of screening for AF compared to no screening and to compare efficacy outcomes of different screening strategies. Materials and methods: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE and MEDLINE from Jan 1, 2000 –Dec 31, 2015 were searched. Studies employing systematic or opportunistic screening and using ECG or pulse palpation in populations age ≥40 years were included. Data describing study and patient characteristics and number of patients with new AF were extracted. The outcome was the incidence of previously undiagnosed AF. Results: We identified 25 unique (3 RCTs and 22 observational) studies (n = 88 786) from 14 countries. The incidence of newly detected AF due to screening was 1.5% (95% CI 1.1 to 1.8%). Systematic screening was more effective than opportunistic: 1.8% (95% CI 1.4 to 2.3%) vs. 1.1% (95% CI 0.6 to 1.6%), p

Suggested Citation

  • Pawel Petryszyn & Piotr Niewinski & Aleksandra Staniak & Patryk Piotrowski & Anna Well & Michal Well & Izabela Jeskowiak & Gregory Lip & Piotr Ponikowski, 2019. "Effectiveness of screening for atrial fibrillation and its determinants. A meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(3), pages 1-17, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0213198
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0213198
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0213198
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0213198&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0213198?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0213198. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.