Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36046429›Full record

ArticleCardiovascular digital health journal2022

Performance of the imPulse device for the detection of atrial fibrillation in hospital settings.

Sinéad T J McDonagh, Shelley Rhodes, Fiona C Warren, Sam Keenan, Claire Pentecost, Philip Keeling, Martin James, Rod S Taylor, Christopher E Clark

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cardiovascular digital health journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 88% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Sinéad T J McDonaghPrimary Care Research Group, Exeter, United Kingdom.
Shelley RhodesExeter Clinical Trials Unit, College of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, United Kingdom.
Fiona C WarrenPrimary Care Research Group, Exeter, United Kingdom.
Sam KeenanRoyal Devon and Exeter National Health Service Foundation Trust, Exeter, United Kingdom.
Claire PentecostExeter Clinical Trials Unit, College of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, United Kingdom.
Philip KeelingTorbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust, Torquay, United Kingdom.
Martin JamesRoyal Devon and Exeter National Health Service Foundation Trust, Exeter, United Kingdom.
Rod S TaylorExeter Clinical Trials Unit, College of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, United Kingdom.
Christopher E ClarkPrimary Care Research Group, Exeter, United Kingdom.
University of Exeter · GBExeter Primary Care · GBNational Health Service · GBTorbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) increases thromboembolism and stroke risk; this can be reduced by oral anticoagulation, but only if AF is detected. A portable, point-of-care device, capable of accurately detecting and identifying AF, could reduce workload and diagnostic delay by minimizing need for follow-up 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECGs). Objective: To assess the diagnostic performance of the Plessey imPulse lead I ECG device compared with a 12-lead ECG in detecting AF. Methods: Cross-sectional diagnostic accuracy study. Participants underwent simultaneous 12-lead ECG and imPulse device recordings. The imPulse device reports AF to be "probable," "possible," "unlikely," or "uncontrolled AF unlikely." imPulse and ECG reference results were cross-tabulated; sensitivity, specificity, positive/negative predictive values, and positive/negative likelihood ratios with 95% confidence interval (CI) were estimated based on different imPulse device report categorizations and heart rate subgroups. Results: A total of 217 participants were recruited (mean age 70.2 [standard deviation 12.7]), 56% male, 57% outpatients, 43% inpatients) and 199 were included in analyses. AF was diagnosed on ECG for 41 of 199 (20.6%) participants and reported by imPulse as possible, probable, or uncontrolled AF unlikely present for 49 of 199 (24.6%). Sensitivity and specificity for imPulse detection of possible, probable, or uncontrolled AF unlikely vs unlikely, compared with ECG, were 80.5% (95% CI, 65.1%-91.2%) and 89.9% (84.1%-94.1%), respectively. When probable or uncontrolled AF unlikely were compared vs possible or unlikely AF, sensitivity and specificity were 63.4% (46.9%-77.9%) and 98.1% (94.6%-99.6%), respectively. Conclusion: The imPulse device has moderate sensitivity and good specificity compared with ECG AF detection in a hospital setting.

Indexed as

ArrhythmiaAtrial fibrillationDiagnosticsScreeningSensitivitySpecificity

Identifiers

PMID36046429
PMCPMC9422064
OpenAlexW4281552907

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.