Cited by 580Atrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesECG Monitoring and AnalysisNon-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring

Assessment of Remote Heart Rhythm Sampling Using the AliveCor Heart Monitor to Screen for Atrial Fibrillation: The REHEARSE-AF Study

Halcox, Julian P.J., Wareham, Kathie, Cardew, Antonia, Gilmore, Mark, Barry, James P., Phillips, Ceri, Gravenor, Michael B.·2017·Circulation

Abstract

Background: Asymptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF) is increasingly common in the aging population and implicated in many ischemic strokes. Earlier identification of AF with appropriate anticoagulation may decrease stroke morbidity and mortality. Methods: We conducted a randomized controlled trial of AF screening using an AliveCor Kardia monitor attached to a WiFi-enabled iPod to obtain ECGs (iECGs) in ambulatory patients. Patients ≥65 years of age with a CHADS-VASc score ≥2 free from AF were randomized to the iECG arm or routine care (RC). iECG participants acquired iECGs twice weekly over 12 months (plus additional iECGs if symptomatic) onto a secure study server with overread by an automated AF detection algorithm and by a cardiac physiologist and/or consultant cardiologist. Time to diagnosis of AF was the primary outcome measure. The overall cost of the devices, ECG interpretation, and patient management were captured and used to generate the cost per AF diagnosis in iECG patients. Clinical events and patient attitudes/experience were also evaluated. Results: We studied 1001 patients (500 iECG, 501 RC) who were 72.6±5.4 years of age; 534 were female. Mean CHADS-VASc score was 3.0 (heart failure, 1.4%; hypertension, 54%; diabetes mellitus, 30%; prior stroke/transient ischemic attack, 6.5%; arterial disease, 15.9%; all CHADS-VASc risk factors were evenly distributed between groups). Nineteen patients in the iECG group were diagnosed with AF over the 12-month study period versus 5 in the RC arm (hazard ratio, 3.9; 95% confidence interval=1.4–10.4; P =0.007) at a cost per AF diagnosis of $10 780 (£8255). There was a similar number of stroke/transient ischemic attack/systemic embolic events (6 versus 10, iECG versus RC; hazard ratio=0.61; 95% confidence interval=0.22–1.69; P =0.34). The majority of iECG patients were satisfied with the device, finding it easy to use without restricting activities or causing anxiety. Conclusions: Screening with twice-weekly single-lead iECG with remote interpretation in ambulatory patients ≥65 years of age at increased risk of stroke is significantly more likely to identify incident AF than RC over a 12-month period. This approach is also highly acceptable to this group of patients, supporting further evaluation in an appropriately powered, event-driven clinical trial. Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.isrctn.com . Unique identifier: ISRCTN10709813.

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 · 10.1161/circulationaha.117.030583

Cites

44 of 44 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?

  • Additional advances are needed to meet the challenging requirements of the NICU, where comprehensive, continuous sensing with wireless functionality, clinical-grade measurement fidelity, and mechanical form factors that eliminate risk of harm to exceptionally fragile neonatal skin are essential.

    “Although such systems can support various types of biophysical measurements of physiological health (8–13), additional advances are needed to meet the challenging requirements of the NICU, where comprehensive, continuous sensing with wireless functionality, clinical-grade measurement fidelity, and mechanical form factors that eliminate risk of harm to exceptionally fragile neonatal skin are essent”
  • Remote ECG monitoring with Kardia in ambulatory patients is more likely to identify atrial fibrillation than routine care.

    “The recent REHEARSE-AF study (19) showed that remote ECG monitoring with Kardia in ambulatory patients is more likely to identify atrial fibrillation than routine care.”

    From Artificial Intelligence in Medicine: Today and Tomorrow (2020) · cites this paper as [19]

  • AliveCor has not yet been assessed against standard care for the broader investigation of palpitations and arrhythmia assessment.

    “Whilst AliveCor has now undergone assessment against conventional care for AF detection [25], it has yet to be assessed against standard care for the broader investigation of palpitations and arrhythmia assessment.”
  • A recent trial comparing AliveCor's technology with routine care (n = 1001) resulted in a nearly fourfold increase in atrial fibrillation diagnosis.

    “A recent trial comparing AliveCor’s technology with routine care (n = 1001) resulted in a nearly fourfold increase in atrial fibrillation diagnosis [15].”

    From Wearables and the Medical Revolution (2018) · cites this paper as [15]

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Halcox, J. P. J., Wareham, K., Cardew, A., Gilmore, M., Barry, J. P., Phillips, C., & Gravenor, M. B.
Affiliations
  • Morriston Hospital (GB)
  • From Swansea University Medical School, UK (J.P.J.H., K.W., M.B.G.); Swansea University College of Health and Human Sciences, UK (C.P., A.C.); Princess of Wales Hospital, Cardiology, Bridgend, UK (M.G.); and Regional Cardiac Centre, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, UK (J.P.B.).
Venue
Circulation
Published
2017-11-07
Volume
136
Issue
19
Pages
1784-1794
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W2752766789
Cited by
580
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 31 · 2025: 53 · 2024: 60 · 2023: 67 · 2022: 67 · 2021: 96 · 2020: 76 · 2019: 72 · 2018: 52 · 2017: 6
FWCI
43.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Circulation (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Atrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › ECG Monitoring and Analysis
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Non-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
Keywords
atrial fibrillation, stroke prevention, systemic embolism, patient satisfaction, older adults, anticoagulation, ischemic stroke risk stratification
MeSH terms
Action Potentials, Aged, Algorithms, Atrial Fibrillation, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Equipment Design, Female, Heart Conduction System, Heart Rate, Humans, Male, Predictive Value of Tests, Prognosis, Prospective Studies, Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted, Telemetry, Time Factors, Wales, Reproducibility of Results, Electrocardiography, Ambulatory, Health Care Costs, Telemedicine, Computers, Handheld, Asymptomatic Diseases, Remote Sensing Technology, Mobile Applications

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