IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pmed00/1002903.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Estimated stroke risk, yield, and number needed to screen for atrial fibrillation detected through single time screening: a multicountry patient-level meta-analysis of 141,220 screened individuals

Author

Listed:
  • Nicole Lowres
  • Jake Olivier
  • Tze-Fan Chao
  • Shih-Ann Chen
  • Yi Chen
  • Axel Diederichsen
  • David A Fitzmaurice
  • Juan Jose Gomez-Doblas
  • Joseph Harbison
  • Jeff S Healey
  • F D Richard Hobbs
  • Femke Kaasenbrood
  • William Keen
  • Vivian W Lee
  • Jes S Lindholt
  • Gregory Y H Lip
  • Georges H Mairesse
  • Jonathan Mant
  • Julie W Martin
  • Enrique Martín-Rioboó
  • David D McManus
  • Javier Muñiz
  • Thomas Münzel
  • Juliet Nakamya
  • Lis Neubeck
  • Jessica J Orchard
  • Luis Ángel Pérula de Torres
  • Marco Proietti
  • F Russell Quinn
  • Andrea K Roalfe
  • Roopinder K Sandhu
  • Renate B Schnabel
  • Breda Smyth
  • Apurv Soni
  • Robert Tieleman
  • Jiguang Wang
  • Philipp S Wild
  • Bryan P Yan
  • Ben Freedman

Abstract

Background: The precise age distribution and calculated stroke risk of screen-detected atrial fibrillation (AF) is not known. Therefore, it is not possible to determine the number needed to screen (NNS) to identify one treatable new AF case (NNS-Rx) (i.e., Class-1 oral anticoagulation [OAC] treatment recommendation) in each age stratum. If the NNS-Rx is known for each age stratum, precise cost-effectiveness and sensitivity simulations can be performed based on the age distribution of the population/region to be screened. Such calculations are required by national authorities and organisations responsible for health system budgets to determine the best age cutoffs for screening programs and decide whether programs of screening should be funded. Therefore, we aimed to determine the exact yield and calculated stroke-risk profile of screen-detected AF and NNS-Rx in 5-year age strata. Methods and findings: A systematic review of Medline, Pubmed, and Embase was performed (January 2007 to February 2018), and AF-SCREEN international collaboration members were contacted to identify additional studies. Twenty-four eligible studies were identified that performed a single time point screen for AF in a general ambulant population, including people ≥65 years. Authors from eligible studies were invited to collaborate and share patient-level data. Statistical analysis was performed using random effects logistic regression for AF detection rate, and Poisson regression modelling for CHA2DS2-VASc scores. Nineteen studies (14 countries from a mix of low- to middle- and high-income countries) collaborated, with 141,220 participants screened and 1,539 new AF cases. Pooled yield of screening was greater in males across all age strata. The age/sex-adjusted detection rate for screen-detected AF in ≥65-year-olds was 1.44% (95% CI, 1.13%–1.82%) and 0.41% (95% CI, 0.31%–0.53%) for 70% have ≥1 additional stroke risk factor other than age/sex. Our data, based on the largest number of screen-detected AF collected to date, show the precise relationship between yield and estimated stroke risk profile with age, and strong dependence for NNS-RX on the age distribution of the population to be screened: essential information for precise cost-effectiveness calculations. Nicole Lowres and colleagues report on stroke risk in people with atrial fibrillation detected by screening.Why was this study done?: What did the researchers do and find?: What do these findings mean?:

Suggested Citation

  • Nicole Lowres & Jake Olivier & Tze-Fan Chao & Shih-Ann Chen & Yi Chen & Axel Diederichsen & David A Fitzmaurice & Juan Jose Gomez-Doblas & Joseph Harbison & Jeff S Healey & F D Richard Hobbs & Femke K, 2019. "Estimated stroke risk, yield, and number needed to screen for atrial fibrillation detected through single time screening: a multicountry patient-level meta-analysis of 141,220 screened individuals," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(9), pages 1-19, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1002903
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002903
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1002903
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1002903&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002903?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:pmed00:1002903. 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: plosmedicine (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/ .

    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.