Results, barriers and enablers in atrial fibrillation case finding: barriers in opportunistic atrial fibrillation case finding-a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is often asymptomatic, and screening is not routinely undertaken. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness of a population-based case finding program and to identify the enablers of and/or barriers to its implementation. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study of a health care case finding program for AF from 1 January 2016, to 31 December 2017, that included 48 336 people ≥60 years of age in the region of Terresde l'Ebre (Catalonia, Spain). We analysed the effect on the prevalence of AF and, stratified by age, on the incidence of new diagnoses of AF. We assessed the sociodemographic and clinical variables related to the realization of a case finding. RESULTS: A total of 32 090 (62.4%) people were screened for AF. We observed a significant increase in the AF prevalence after 2 years of program intervention (5.9-7.7%; P < 0.001). The detection of new AF cases was significantly higher in the case finding group across the whole of the age range, and 765 (2.6%) new AF cases were diagnosed using case finding. The factors that were significantly associated with an underuse of case finding were: age <70 years, urban residence, institutionalized status, Pfeiffer score ≥2, Charlson score >3 and number of visits <7/year. CONCLUSIONS: A health care program of case finding is feasible and is associated with a significant increase in the prevalence and incidence of AF. The results depend on factors such as the ease of access to health care, age, place of residence and comorbidities.

Prevalence of undiagnosed atrial fibrillation and of that not being treated with anticoagulant drugs: the AFABE study.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Atrial fibrillation constitutes a serious public health problem because it can lead to complications. Thus, the management of this arrhythmia must include not only its treatment, but antithrombotic therapy as well. The main goal is to determine the proportion of cases of undiagnosed atrial fibrillation and the proportion of patients not being treated with oral anticoagulants. METHODS: A multicenter, population-based, retrospective, cross-sectional, observational study. In all, 1043 participants over 60 years of age were randomly selected to undergo an electrocardiogram in a prearranged appointment. Demographic data, CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED scores, international normalized ratio results, and reasons for not receiving oral anticoagulant therapy were recorded. RESULTS: The overall prevalence of atrial fibrillation was 10.9% (95% confidence interval, 9.1%-12.8%), 20.1% of which had not been diagnosed previously. In the group with known atrial fibrillation, 23.5% of those with CHA2DS2-VASc≥2 were not receiving oral anticoagulant therapy, and 47.9% had a HAS-BLED score≥3. The odds ratio for not being treated with oral anticoagulation was 2.04 (95% confidence interval, 1.11-3.77) for women, 1.10 (95% confidence interval, 1.05-1.15) for more advanced age at diagnosis, and 8.61 (95% confidence interval 2.38-31.0) for a CHA2DS2-VASc score<2. Cognitive impairment (15.2%) was the main reason for not receiving oral anticoagulant therapy. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of previously undiagnosed atrial fibrillation in individuals over 60 years of age is 20.1%, and 23.5% of those who have been diagnosed receive no treatment with oral anticoagulants.