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?

Accepted for/Published in: JMIR mHealth and uHealth

Date Submitted: Sep 21, 2020
Date Accepted: Dec 12, 2020

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

Performance of a Mobile Single-Lead Electrocardiogram Technology for Atrial Fibrillation Screening in a Semirural African Population: Insights From “The Heart of Ethiopia: Focus on Atrial Fibrillation” (TEFF-AF) Study

Pitman B, Chew SH, Wong C, Jaghoori A, Iwai S, Thomas G, Chew A, Sanders P, Lau D

Performance of a Mobile Single-Lead Electrocardiogram Technology for Atrial Fibrillation Screening in a Semirural African Population: Insights From “The Heart of Ethiopia: Focus on Atrial Fibrillation” (TEFF-AF) Study

JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2021;9(5):e24470

DOI: 10.2196/24470

PMID: 34009129

PMCID: 8173399

Performance of a mobile single-lead electrocardiogram technology for atrial fibrillation screening in a semi-rural African population: Insights from the TEFF-AF Study

  • Bradley Pitman; 
  • Sok-Hui Chew; 
  • Christopher Wong; 
  • Amenah Jaghoori; 
  • Shinsuke Iwai; 
  • Gijo Thomas; 
  • Andrew Chew; 
  • Prashanthan Sanders; 
  • Dennis Lau

ABSTRACT

Background:

Atrial fibrillation (AF) screening using mobile single-lead electrocardiogram (EKG) devices has demonstrated variable sensitivity and specificity. However, limited data exists on the usage of such devices in low resource countries.

Objective:

To evaluate the utility of the KardiaMobile device (KM, AliveCor Inc, CA, USA) for AF screening in a semi-rural Ethiopian population.

Methods:

Thirty second single-lead EKG tracings obtained using the KM device from 1,500 TEFF-AF (The hEart oF Ethiopia: Focus on Atrial Fibrillation; ACTR Number: 12619001107112) study participants were analyzed. We evaluated the KM device performance for AF screening by comparing KM’s automated algorithm with cardiologist’s interpretation.

Results:

A total of 1,709 single-lead EKG tracings (including repeat tracing on 209 occasions) were analyzed from 1,500 Ethiopians (64% male, 35±13 years old) who presented for AF screening. Initial successful rhythm decision (“normal” or “possible AF”) with one single-lead EKG tracing was lower with the KM automated algorithm versus manual verification by cardiologists (78% vs. 97%, P<.001). Repeat single-lead EKG tracings in 209 individuals improved overall rhythm decision, but the KM automated algorithm remained inferior (87% vs. 99%, P<.001). The key reasons underlying unsuccessful KM automated rhythm determination (n=408 traces) include poor quality/noisy tracings (52%), frequent ectopy (5%) and tachycardia (>100bpm; 41%). The sensitivity and specificity of KM automated rhythm diagnosis was 81% and 78% respectively.

Conclusions:

The performance of the KM single-lead EKG device with automated algorithm was sub-optimal when used for AF screening. Repeat KM tracing and physician’s input are necessary for improving rhythm decision success. Clinical Trial: ACTR Number: 12619001107112


 Citation

Please cite as:

Pitman B, Chew SH, Wong C, Jaghoori A, Iwai S, Thomas G, Chew A, Sanders P, Lau D

Performance of a Mobile Single-Lead Electrocardiogram Technology for Atrial Fibrillation Screening in a Semirural African Population: Insights From “The Heart of Ethiopia: Focus on Atrial Fibrillation” (TEFF-AF) Study

JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2021;9(5):e24470

DOI: 10.2196/24470

PMID: 34009129

PMCID: 8173399

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.