Screening versus routine practice in detection of atrial fibrillation in patients aged 65 or over: cluster randomised controlled trial

被引:297
作者
Fitzmaurice, David A.
Hobbs, F. D. Richard [1 ]
Jowett, Sue
Mant, Jonathon
Murray, Ellen T.
Holder, Roger
Raftery, J. P.
Bryan, S.
Davies, Michael
Lip, Gregory Y. H.
Allan, T. F.
机构
[1] Univ Birmingham, Dept Primary Care & Gen Practice, Birmingham B15 2TT, W Midlands, England
[2] Univ Southampton, Wessex Inst Hlth Res & Dev, Southampton SO9 5NH, Hants, England
[3] Univ Birmingham, Hlth Econ Facil, Birmingham B15 2TT, W Midlands, England
[4] Selly Oak Hosp, Birmingham B29 6JD, W Midlands, England
[5] City Hosp, Univ Dept Med, Birmingham, W Midlands, England
[6] City Univ London, St Bartholomews Sch Nursing & Midwifery, Hlth Care Res Unit, London, England
来源
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL | 2007年 / 335卷 / 7616期
关键词
D O I
10.1136/bmj.39280.660567.55
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Objectives To assess whether screening improves the detection of atrial fibrillation (cluster randomisation) and to compare systematic and opportunistic screening. Design Multicentre cluster randomised controlled trial, with subsidiary trial embedded within the intervention arm. Setting 50 primary care centres in England, with further individual randomisation of patients in the intervention practices. Participants 14 802 patients aged 65 or over in 25 intervention and 25 control practices. Interventions Patients in intervention practices were randomly allocated to systematic screening (invitation for electrocardiography) or opportunistic screening (pulse taking and invitation for electrocardiography if the pulse was irregular). Screening took place over 12 months in each practice from October 2001 to February 2003. No active screening took place in control practices. Main outcome measure Newly identified atrial fibrillation. Results The detection rate of new cases of atrial fibrillation was 1.63% a year in the intervention practices and 1.04% in control practices (difference 0.59%, 95% confidence interval 0.20% to 0.98%). Systematic and opportunistic screening detected similar numbers of new cases (1.62% v 1.64%, difference 0.02%, -0.5% to 0.5%). Conclusion Active screening for atrial fibrillation detects additional cases over current practice. The preferred method of screening in patients aged 65 or over in primary care is opportunistic pulse taking with follow-up electrocardiography. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN19633732.
引用
收藏
页码:383 / 386
页数:4
相关论文
共 6 条
[1]   Trends in the prevalence and management of atrial fibrillation in general practice in England and Wales, 1994-1998: analysis of data from the general practice research database [J].
Majeed, A ;
Moser, K ;
Carroll, K .
HEART, 2001, 86 (03) :284-288
[2]  
Marjoram J, 1996, BRIT J GEN PRACT, V46, P283
[3]  
Morgan S, 2002, BRIT J GEN PRACT, V52, P373
[4]  
Somerville S, 2000, BRIT J GEN PRACT, V50, P727
[5]   Screening for atrial fibrillation in primary care [J].
Wheeldon, NM ;
Tayler, DI ;
Anagnostou, E ;
Cook, D ;
Wales, C ;
Oakley, GDG .
HEART, 1998, 79 (01) :50-55
[6]  
Wilson J MG., 1968, Public Health Papers, V34