Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Previously submitted to: JMIR mHealth and uHealth (no longer under consideration since Dec 30, 2021)

Date Submitted: Nov 24, 2020
Open Peer Review Period: Nov 23, 2020 - Jan 18, 2021
(closed for review but you can still tweet)

NOTE: This is an unreviewed Preprint

Warning: This is a unreviewed preprint (What is a preprint?). Readers are warned that the document has not been peer-reviewed by expert/patient reviewers or an academic editor, may contain misleading claims, and is likely to undergo changes before final publication, if accepted, or may have been rejected/withdrawn (a note "no longer under consideration" will appear above).

Peer review me: Readers with interest and expertise are encouraged to sign up as peer-reviewer, if the paper is within an open peer-review period (in this case, a "Peer Review Me" button to sign up as reviewer is displayed above). All preprints currently open for review are listed here. Outside of the formal open peer-review period we encourage you to tweet about the preprint.

Citation: Please cite this preprint only for review purposes or for grant applications and CVs (if you are the author).

Final version: If our system detects a final peer-reviewed "version of record" (VoR) published in any journal, a link to that VoR will appear below. Readers are then encourage to cite the VoR instead of this preprint.

Settings: If you are the author, you can login and change the preprint display settings, but the preprint URL/DOI is supposed to be stable and citable, so it should not be removed once posted.

Submit: To post your own preprint, simply submit to any JMIR journal, and choose the appropriate settings to expose your submitted version as preprint.

Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.

Smartphone applications for the detection of atrial fibrillation in primary care: a review

  • Nicholas Fraser

ABSTRACT

Background:

Smartphone technology continues to advance at a fervid pace. In the field of cardiology, traditional physical tests recommended to detect cardiac arrhythmias may soon be superseded by low-cost, convenient and reliable smartphone apps. We aimed to determine the screening test accuracy of smartphone apps in detecting atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients within primary care.

Objective:

The aim of this review was to determine the screening test accuracy of smartphone apps in detecting atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients within primary care.

Methods:

Systematically searched MEDLINE, PUBMED, Web of Science, CINAHL and Cochrane Library until 01 February 2019. Articles were screened, and evaluated before relevant data extracted and study quality appraised using the QUADAS-2 tool. The raw test accuracy data was constructed into a 2x2 contingency table and the test accuracy statistics were calculated, and organised in descriptive plots.

Results:

Seven cross-sectional studies tested one, or two smartphone apps including the AliveCor 1-lead 30 sec ECG (seven studies; n=16,359), and the Cardiio Rhythm PPG (one study; n=1,012). The prevalence of AF ranged from 1.17%-12.29%, with a mean of 2.65%. The AliveCor 1-lead device reported a sensitivity ranging from 0.92 to 0.99, and specificity from 0.99 to 1.00. Sensitivity and PPV showed the greatest heterogeneity, with results ranging from suboptimal to excellent. The Cardiio Rhythm PPG app recorded a sensitivity of 0.71 (95% CI 0.51-0.87) and specificity of 0.99 (95% CI 0.98-1.00).

Conclusions:

Community screening for AF using smartphone electrocardiography (ECG) or photoplethysmography (PPG) is feasible. Smartphone apps that screen for AF in primary care demonstrate excellent specificity, but suboptimal sensitivity. Further optimisation of detection algorithms, to accommodate the spectrum of disease seen within the community, should be considered before such devices are used as a tool for systematic auto-screening.


 Citation

Please cite as:

Fraser N

Smartphone applications for the detection of atrial fibrillation in primary care: a review

JMIR Preprints. 24/11/2020:26001

DOI: 10.2196/preprints.26001

URL: https://preprints.jmir.org/preprint/26001

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.