Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31837709›Full record

ArticleBMC family practice2019

How do Dutch general practitioners detect and diagnose atrial fibrillation? Results of an online case vignette study.

N Verbiest-van Gurp, D van Mil, H A M van Kesteren, J A Knottnerus, H E J H Stoffers

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC family practice, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Screening and detection of atrial fibrillation in primary care: current practice and future perspectives.European heart journal supplements : journal of the European Society of Cardiology · 2024
    Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. How is atrial fibrillation detected in everyday healthcare? Results of a Dutch cohort study.Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation · 2023
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

N Verbiest-van GurpCare and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Department of Family Medicine, Maastricht University, Peter Debyeplein 1, 6229 HA, Maastricht, Limburg, The Netherlands. nicole.vangurp@maastrichtuniversity.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8810-9147
D van MilCare and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Department of Family Medicine, Maastricht University, Peter Debyeplein 1, 6229 HA, Maastricht, Limburg, The Netherlands.
H A M van KesterenDepartment of Cardiology, Admiraal de Ruyter Ziekenhuis, 's-Gravenpolderseweg 114, 4462, RA Goes, Zeeland, The Netherlands.
J A KnottnerusCare and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Department of Family Medicine, Maastricht University, Peter Debyeplein 1, 6229 HA, Maastricht, Limburg, The Netherlands.
H E J H StoffersCare and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Department of Family Medicine, Maastricht University, Peter Debyeplein 1, 6229 HA, Maastricht, Limburg, The Netherlands.
Maastricht University · NLAdmiraal De Ruyter Ziekenhuis · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDetection and treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF) are important given the serious health consequences. AF may be silent or paroxysmal and remain undetected. It is unclear whether general practitioners (GPs) have appropriate equipment and optimally utilise it to detect AF. This case vignette study aimed to describe current practice and to explore possible improvements to optimise AF detection.

methodsBetween June and July 2017, we performed an online case vignette study among Dutch GPs. We aimed at obtaining at least 75 responses to the questionnaire. We collected demographics and asked GPs' opinion on their knowledge and experience in diagnosing AF. GPs could indicate which diagnostic tools they have for AF. In six case vignettes with varying symptom frequency and physical signs, they could make diagnostic choices. The last questions covered screening and actions after diagnosing AF. We compared the answers to the Dutch guideline for GPs on AF.

resultsSeventy-six GPs completed the questionnaire. Seventy-four GPs (97%) thought they have enough knowledge and 72 (95%) enough experience to diagnose AF. Seventy-four GPs (97%) could order or perform ECGs without the interference of a cardiologist. In case of frequent symptoms of AF, 36-40% would choose short-term (i.e. 24-48 h) and 11-19% long-term (i.e. 7 days, 14 days or 1 month) monitoring. In case of non-frequent symptoms, 29-31% would choose short-term and 21-30% long-term monitoring. If opportunistic screening in primary care proves to be effective, 83% (58/70) will support it.

conclusionsResponding GPs report to have adequate equipment, knowledge, and experience to detect and diagnose AF. Almost all participants can order ECGs. Reported monitoring duration was shorter than recommended by the guideline. AF detection could improve by increasing the monitoring duration.

Indexed as

Practice Patterns, Physicians'AdultAgedAtrial FibrillationElectrocardiographyElectrocardiography, AmbulatoryFemaleGeneral PractitionersHumansMaleMiddle AgedNetherlandsSurveys and QuestionnairesAmbulatoryAtrial fibrillationDiagnosisElectrocardiographyGeneral practiceHealth care surveys

Identifiers

PMID31837709
PMCPMC6911277
OpenAlexW2995866271

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.