Cited by 405Atrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesHealth Promotion and Cardiovascular PreventionAcute Ischemic Stroke Management

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

Open access
Fitzmaurice, David A, Hobbs, F D Richard, Jowett, Sue, Mant, Jonathon, Murray, Ellen T, Holder, Roger, Raftery, J P, Bryan, S +3 more·2007·BMJ

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To assess whether screening improves the detection of atrial fibrillation (cluster randomisation) and to compare systematic and opportunistic screening. DESIGN: Multicentred 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 [controlled-trials.com].

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/bmj.39280.660567.55

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 11

  1. Wolf PA, Abbott RD, Kannel WB. Atrial fibrillation as an independent risk factor for stroke: the Framingham study. Stroke 1991;22:983-8.
  2. Majeed A, Moser K, Carroll K. Trends in prevalence of atrial fibrillation in general practice in England and Wales, 1994-1998: analysis of data from the general practice research database. Heart 2001;86:284-8.
  3. Atrial Fibrillation Investigators. Risk factors for stroke and efficacy of antithrombotic therapy in atrial fibrillation; analysis of pooled data from five randomised controlled trials. Arch Int Med 1994;154:1449-57.
  4. Sudlow M, Rodgers H, Kenny RA, Thomson R. Identification of patients with atrial fibrillation in general practice: a study of screening methods. BMJ 1998;317:327-8.
  5. Morgan S, Mant D. Randomised trial of two approaches to screening for atrial fibrillation in UK general practice. Br J Gen Pract 2002;52:373-80.
  6. Somerville S, Somerville J, Croft P, Lewis M. Atrial fibrillation: a comparison of methods to identify cases in general practice. Br J Gen Pract 2000;50:727-9.
  7. Wheeldon NM, Tayler DI, Anagnostou E, Cook D, Wales C, Oakley GDG. Screening for atrial fibrillation in primary care. Heart 1998;79:50-5.
  8. Lip GYH, Golding D, Nazir M, Beevers D, Child D, Fletcher R. A survey of atrial fibrillation in general practice: the West Birmingham atrial fibrillation project. Br J Gen Pract 1997;47:285-9.
  9. Marjoram J, Strachan R, Allan A, Allan E. Screening for colorectal cancer a general practice based study. Br J Gen Pract 1996;46:283-6.
  10. Davies RC, Hobbs FDR, Kenkre JE, Roalfe AK, Hare R, Lancashire RJ, Davies MK. Prevalence of left ventricular systolic dysfunction and heart failure in high risk patients: community based epidemiological study. BMJ 2002;325:1156-61.
  11. Onyeka BA. Martin-Hirsch P. Information leaflets, verbal information and women's knowledge of abnormal cervical smears and colposcopy. J Obstet Gynaecol 2003;23:174-6.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fitzmaurice, D. A., Hobbs, F. D. R., Jowett, S., Mant, J., Murray, E. T., Holder, R., Raftery, J. P., Bryan, S., Davies, M., Lip, G. Y. H., & Allan, T. F.
Affiliations
  • University of Birmingham (GB)
  • University of Southampton (GB)
  • Selly Oak Hospital (GB)
  • Birmingham City Hospital (GB)
  • City, University of London (GB)
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2007-08-02
Volume
335
Issue
7616
Pages
383
ISSN
  • 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
  • 0959-8138
  • 1468-5833
OpenAlex
W2020061893
Cited by
405
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 32 · 2020: 29 · 2019: 33 · 2018: 29 · 2017: 34 · 2016: 28 · 2015: 23 · 2014: 28 · 2013: 25 · 2012: 20
FWCI
7.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMJ (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ePrints Soton (University of Southampton) (submittedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
  • University of Birmingham Research Portal (University of Birmingham) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Atrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Health Promotion and Cardiovascular Prevention
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Acute Ischemic Stroke Management
Keywords
atrial fibrillation, screening, systematic screening, opportunistic screening, electrocardiogram, pulse measurement, older adults, primary care, atrial fibrillation detection, irregular pulse
MeSH terms
Aged, Atrial Fibrillation, Electrocardiography, England, Family Practice, Humans, Mass Screening, Nurse Practitioners, Prognosis, Prevalence, Cluster Analysis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review