Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31701215›Full record

Observational studyClinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society2020

Validation of the modified Microlife blood pressure monitor in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation.

Nina Huppertz, Gregory Y H Lip, Deirdre A Lane

Open access · hybridAbstract readObservational Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 27% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring with atrial fibrillation detection algorithm: two birds with one stone.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Nina HuppertzSandwell and West Birmingham Hospitals NHS Trust, Birmingham, UK.
Gregory Y H LipLiverpool Centre for Cardiovascular Science, Institute of Ageing and Chronic Disease, University of Liverpool and Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital, William Henry Duncan Building, 6 West Derby Street, Liverpool, L7 8TX, UK.
Deirdre A LaneLiverpool Centre for Cardiovascular Science, Institute of Ageing and Chronic Disease, University of Liverpool and Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital, William Henry Duncan Building, 6 West Derby Street, Liverpool, L7 8TX, UK. deirdre.lane@liverpool.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5604-9378
University of Liverpool · GBSandwell & West Birmingham Hospitals NHS Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsUndiagnosed atrial fibrillation (AF) accounts for 6% of all strokes, therefore early detection and treatment of the arrhythmia are paramount. Previous research has illustrated that the Microlife WatchBPO3 AFIB, an automated blood pressure (BP) monitor with an inbuilt AF algorithm, accurately detects permanent AF. Currently, limited data exist on whether the modified BP monitor is able to detect paroxysmal AF (PAF). Therefore, this study aims to assess the accuracy of the Microlife WatchBPO3 AFIB monitor to detect PAF against a pacemaker reference standard over a 24-h period. METHODS AND

resultsForty-eight patients with a pacemaker implanted for sick sinus syndrome and previously documented fast AF participated. Sensitivity of the atrial pacemaker lead was set to allow detection of signals of ≥ 0.5 mV. Patients engaged in their normal daily routine whilst wearing the modified BP monitor. The modified BP monitor demonstrated an overall sensitivity of 76.0% and specificity of 80.8% for detecting PAF. This sensitivity and specificity increased to 100% and 83.1%, respectively, for patients that achieved more than 80% successful BP readings. Compared to day-time readings, night-time readings also demonstrated a lower proportion of movement artefact (14.4% vs. 3.4%), and therefore, a higher sensitivity and specificity of 100% and 84.9%, respectively, for detecting PAF.

conclusionThe Microlife WatchBPO3 AFIB device has an acceptable diagnostic accuracy to detect PAF; however, movement artefact affects the accuracy of the readings. This modified BP monitor may potentially be useful as a screening tool for AF in patients at high risk of developing stroke.

Indexed as

Blood Pressure MonitorsAgedAged, 80 and overAlgorithmsAtrial FibrillationCohort StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPacemaker, ArtificialSensitivity and SpecificitySick Sinus SyndromeAtrial fibrillationBlood pressureDetectionSensitivitySpecificity

Identifiers

PMID31701215
PMCPMC7308245
OpenAlexW2988303821

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.