Swancutt, D.R. and Hobbs, F.D.R. and Fitzmaurice, D.A. and Mant, J.W.F. and Murray, E.T. and Jowett, S.M. and Raftery, J.P. and Bryan, S. and Davies, M.K. and Lip, G.Y.H. (2004) A randomised controlled trial and cost effectiveness study of systematic screening (targeted and total population screening) versus routine practice for the detection of atrial fibrillation in the over 65s: (SAFE). BMC Cardiovascular Disorders, 4 (12). ISSN 1471-2261
|This item has no file(s) to display.|
URL of Published Version: http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1471-2261-4-12.pdf
Identification Number/DOI: 10.1186/1471-2261-4-12
Atrial fibrillation (AF) has been recognised as an important independent risk factor for thromboembolic disease, particularly stroke for which it provides a five-fold increase in risk. This study aimed to determine the baseline prevalence and the incidence of AF based on a variety of screening strategies and in doing so to evaluate the incremental cost-effectiveness of different screening strategies, including targeted or whole population screening, compared with routine clinical practice, for detection of AF in people aged 65 and over. The value of clinical assessment and echocardiography as additional methods of risk stratification for thromboembolic disease in patients with AF were also evaluated.
The study design was a multi-centre randomised controlled trial with a study population of patients aged 65 and over from 50 General Practices in the West Midlands. These purposefully selected general practices were randomly allocated to 25 intervention practices and 25 control practices. GPs and practice nurses within the intervention practices received education on the importance of AF detection and ECG interpretation. Patients in the intervention practices were randomly allocated to systematic (n = 5000) or opportunistic screening (n = 5000). Prospective identification of pre-existing risk factors for AF within the screened population enabled comparison between high risk targeted screening and total population screening. AF detection rates in systematically screened and opportunistically screened populations in the intervention practices were compared to AF detection rate in 5,000 patients in the control practices
Repository Staff Only: item control page