TL;DR: To assess the accuracy of an automated blood pressure device in pregnancy and pre‐eclampsia according to the British Hypertension Society protocol, Microlife 3BTO‐A is used.
TL;DR: Data suggest that an electronic device for self-home BP monitoring, which implements an algorithm for AF diagnosis has an excellent diagnostic accuracy and might, therefore, be used as a reliable screening test for the early diagnosis.
Abstract: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common sustained arrhythmia and is associated with an increased long-term risk of stroke. A screening test for early diagnosis has the potential to prevent AF-related strokes. This study assessed the diagnostic accuracy of an automated device for self-home blood pressure (BP) monitoring, which implements an algorithm for AF detection. A modified, automated oscillometric device for self-home BP monitoring (Microlife BPA100 Plus, Microlife, Heerbrugg, Switzerland) with an AF detector was used to carry out triplicate BP measurements in subjects with sinus rhythm, AF and non-AF arrhythmias. During each BP measurement, the electrocardiogram (ECG) was recorded simultaneously. A total of 217 simultaneous BP measurements and ECG recordings were obtained from 73 subjects. Twenty-seven subjects (37%) had AF, 23 (31%) non-AF arrhythmias and 23 (31%) had sinus rhythm. A single measurement had 93% sensitivity and 89% specificity for detecting AF. For two measurements, in which one of them was required to detect AF, the sensitivity was 100% and specificity 76%, whereas for three measurements, in which two of them were required to detect AF, the sensitivity was 100% and specificity 89% (kappa=0.86 for an agreement with ECG). Using the latter approach, there were five false positive cases all having irregularities in approximately 50% of the heartbeats. In patients with tachyarrhythmia, the device underestimated heart rate. These data suggest that an electronic device for self-home BP monitoring, which implements an algorithm for AF diagnosis has an excellent diagnostic accuracy and might, therefore, be used as a reliable screening test for the early diagnosis.
TL;DR: The findings of a prospective AF screening study coordinated by the University of Hong Kong and the Department of Health and Care Excellence are reported.
Abstract: The diagnosis of atrial fibrillation (AF) before stroke is a priority in successful stroke prevention. Despite guidelines that advocate pulse palpation for AF screening, it is not performed routinely in clinical practice. Various handheld or smartphone devices designed to specifically detect AF have gained much popularity. Of these state-of-the-art devices, the AliveCor Heart Monitor, a smartphone-based heart monitor that incorporates dry electrodes mounted on a smartphone case capable of recording a single-lead ECG, has already been US Food and Drug Administration-cleared and Conformite Europeene-marked. In Europe, an automatic oscillometric blood pressure device that incorporates a specific algorithm to detect AF (Microlife WatchBP Office AFIB, Microlife AG) has been recommended by the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence to screen for AF during office blood pressure measurement in patients ≥65 years of age. These new devices have typically been evaluated in relatively small populations and not compared head to head. Their general use for widespread AF screening in a primary healthcare setting remains questionable. We report the findings of a prospective AF screening study coordinated by the University of Hong Kong and the Department of …
TL;DR: The specificity of both devices is acceptable, but only the Microlife BPM has a sensitivity value that is high enough to be used for AF screening in clinical practice.
Abstract: Screening for atrial fibrillation (AF) by assessing the pulse is recommended in high-risk patients. Some clinical trials demonstrated that the Microlife blood pressure monitor (BPM) with AF detection is more accurate than pulse palpation. This led to a change in practice guidelines in the United Kingdom where AF screening with the Microlife device is recommended instead of pulse palpation. Many BPMs have irregular heart beat detection, but they have not been shown to detect AF reliably. Recently, one study, in a highly select population, suggested that the Omron BPM with irregular heart beat detection has a higher sensitivity for AF than the Microlife BPM. We compared the Microlife and Omron BPMs to electrocardiographic readings for AF detection in general cardiology patients. Inclusion criteria were age ≥50 years without a pacemaker or defibrillator. A total of 199 subjects were enrolled, 30 with AF. Each subject had a 12-lead electrocardiography, 1 Omron BPM reading, and 3 Microlife BPM readings as per device instructions. The Omron device had a sensitivity of 30% (95% confidence interval [CI] 15.4% to 49.1%) with the sensitivity for the first Microlife reading of 97% (95% CI 81.4% to 100%) and the Microlife readings using the majority rule (AF positive if at least 2 of 3 individual readings were positive for AF) of 100% (95% CI 85.9% to 100%). Specificity for the Omron device was 97% (95% CI 92.5% to 99.2%) and for the first Microlife reading of 90% (95% CI 83.8% to 94.2%) and for the majority rule Microlife device of 92% (95% CI 86.2% to 95.7%; p
TL;DR: Results indicate that the Microlife WatchBP O3 monitor can be recommended for clinical use in the adult population and passed all three phases of the European Society of Hypertension protocol for SBP and DBP.
Abstract: To determine the accuracy of the Microlife WatchBP O3 blood pressure measuring device tested according to the requirements of the International Protocol of the European Society of Hypertension The WatchBP O3 is designed to provide clinic, ambulatory, and self blood pressure (BP) measurements Devic