Predictive validity of automated oscillometric blood pressure monitors for screening atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

References

• Kirchhof P, Benussi S, Kotecha D, et al. 2016 ESC Guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation developed in collaboration with EACTS. Europace. 2016;18:1609–1678.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mariresse GH, Moran P, Van Gelder IC, et al. Screening for atrial fibrillation: a European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) consensus document endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), and Sociedad Latinoamericana de Estimulación Cardíaca y Electrofisiología (SOLAECE). Europace. 2017;19:1589–1623.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Camm AJ, Lip GY, De Caterina R, et al. 2012 focused update of the ESC Guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation: an update of the 2010 ESC Guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation. Developed with the special contribution of the European Heart Rhythm Association. Eur Heart J. 2012;33:2719–2747.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cha MJ. Stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation. Int J Arrhythm. 2017;18:137–142.
   Google Scholar
• Cho CY, Jung DH, Ko JS, et al. New risk factors for thromboembolic complications in atrial fibrillation. Korean J Med. 2006;71:371–380.
   Google Scholar
• Healey JS, Connolly SJ, Gold MR, et al. Subclinical atrial fibrillation and the risk of stroke. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:120–129.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harris K, Edwards D, Mant J. How can we best detect atrial fibrillation? J R Coll Physicians Edinb. 2012;42(Suppl18):5–22.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lankveld TA, Zeemering S, Crijns HJ, et al. The ECG as a tool to determine atrial fibrillation complexity. Heart. 2014;100:1077–1084.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). Minamata Convention on Mercury fact sheet [Internet]. Geneva (Switzerland): UNEP. [cited 2018 Dec 25]. Available from: http://www.mercuryconvention.org/Portals/11/documents/Awareness%20raising/FACT%20SHEETS/Minamata%20Convention%20on%20Mercury%20at%20a%20glance_COP1%202017.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Drzewiecki G, Hood R, Apple H. Theory of the oscillometric maximum and the systolic and diastolic detection ratio. Ann Biomed Eng. 1994;22:88–96.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alpert BS, Quinn D, Gallick D. Oscillometric blood pressure: a review for clinicians. J Am Soc Hypertens. 2014;8:930–938.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang QF, Sheng CS, Zhang Y, et al. Accuracy of automated oscillometric blood pressure monitors in the detection of cardiac arrhythmias. Blood Press Monit. 2009;14:91–92.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verberk WJ, Omboni S, Kollias A, et al. Screening for atrial fibrillation with automated blood pressure measurement: research evidence and practice recommendations. Int J Cardiol. 2016;203:465–473.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Medical Technology Guidance 13: watchBP Home A for opportunistically detecting atrial fibrillation during diagnosis and monitoring of hypertension [Internet]. Manchester (UK): NICE; 2013 Jan 16. cited 2018 Dec 25. Available from: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/mtg13/resources/watchbp-homea-for-opportunistically-detecting-atrial-fibrillation-during-diagnosis-and-monitoring-of-hypertension-pdf-64371872699845
   Google Scholar
• Babbs CF. Oscillometric measurement of systolic and diastolic blood pressures validated in a physiologic mathematical model. BioMed Eng Online. 2012;11:56.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bossuyt P, Davenport C, Deeks J, et al. Chapter 11: interpreting results and drawing conclusions. In: Deeks JJ, Bossuyt PM, Gatsonis C, editors. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy version 0.9. London, UK: The Cochrane Collaboration; 2013. P. 3-30.
   Google Scholar
• Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-Analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151:264–269.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network. Search filters [Internet]. Edinburgh (UK): SIGN. c2001–2018. [cited 2014 Aug 01] Available from https://www.sign.ac.uk/search-filters.html
   Google Scholar
• Whiting PF, Rutjes AW, Westwood ME, et al. QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med. 2011;155:529–536.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zamora J, Abraira V, Muriel A, et al. Meta-DiSc: a software for meta-analysis of test accuracy data. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2006;6:31.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Greiner M, Pfeiffer D, Smith RD. Principles and practical application of the receiver-operating characteristic analysis for diagnostic tests. Prev Vet Med. 2000;45:23–41.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walter SD. Properties of the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve for diagnostic test data. Stat Med. 2002;21:1237–1256.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Higgins JP, Thompson SG. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2002;21:1539–1558.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singh BN. Atrial fibrillation: epidemiologic considerations and rationale for conversion and maintenance of sinus rhythm. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol Ther. 2003;8:13–26.
   Google Scholar
• Eun JN, Cho JG, Kim SS, et al. Prevalence of atrial fibrillation in the elderly in Korea. J Korean Geriatr Soc. 2016;20:29–35.
   Google Scholar
• Jung KH, Lee SH, Kim BJ, et al. Secular trends in ischemic stroke characteristics in a rapidly developed country: results from the Korean Stroke Registry Study (secular trends in Korean stroke). Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2012;5:327–334.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jeong JH. Prevalence of and risk factors for atrial fibrillation in Korean adults older than 40 years. J Korean Med Sci. 2005;20:26–30.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moran PS, Flattery MJ, Teljeur C, et al. Effectiveness of systematic screening for the detection of atrial fibrillation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;30:CD009586.
   Google Scholar
• Wann LS, Curtis AB, Ellenbogen KA, et al. Management of patients with atrial fibrillation (compilation of 2006 ACCF/AHA/ESC and 2011 ACCF/AHA/HRS recommendations): a report of the American College of Cardiology/American heart association task force on practice guidelines. Circulation. 2013;127:1916–1926.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maxim LD, Niebo R, Utell MJ. Screening tests: a review with examples. Inhal Toxicol. 2014;26:811–828.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

• Kollias A, Destounis A, Kalogeropoulos P, et al. Atrial fibrillation detection during 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring: comparison with 24-hour electrocardiography. Hypertension. 2018;72:110–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kabutoya T, Imai Y, Hoshide S, Kario K. Diagnostic accuracy of a new algorithm to detect atrial fibrillation in a home blood pressure monitor. J Clin Hypertens. 2017;19:1143–7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiesel J, Salomone TJ. Screening for atrial fibrillation in patients ≥65 years using an automatic blood pressure monitor in a skilled nursing facility. Am J Cardiol. 2017;120:1322–4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chan PH, Wong CK, Pun L, et al. Diagnostic performance of an automatic blood pressure measurement device, Microlife WatchBP Home A, for atrial fibrillation screening in a real-world primary care setting. BMJ Open. 2017;7:e013685.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gandolfo C, Balestrino M, Bruno C, et al. Validation of a simple method for atrial fibrillation screening in patients with stroke. Neurol Sci. 2015;36:1675–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Omboni S, Verberk WJ. Opportunistic screening of atrial fibrillation by automatic blood pressure measurement in the community. BMJ Open. 2016;6:e010745.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kearley K, Selwood M, Van Den BA, et al. Triage tests for identifying atrial fibrillation in primary care: A diagnostic accuracy study comparing single-lead ECG and modified BP monitors. BMJ Open. 2014;4:e004565.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiesel J, Arbesfeld B, Schechter D. Comparison of the Microlife blood pressure monitor with the Omron blood pressure monitor for detecting atrial fibrillation. Am J Cardiol. 2014;114:1046–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiesel J, Abraham S, Messineo F. Screening for asymptomatic atrial fibrillation while monitoring the blood pressure at home: trial of regular versus irregular pulse for prevention of stroke (TRIPPS 2.0). Am J Cardiol. 2013;111:1598–601.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marazzi G, Iellamo F, Volterrani M, et al. Comparison of Microlife BP A200 Plus and Omron M6 blood pressure monitors to detect atrial fibrillation in hypertensive patients. [Erratum appears in Adv Ther. 2014; 31:1317]. Adv Ther. 2012;29:64–70.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stergiou GS, Karpettas N, Protogerou A, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of a home blood pressure monitor to detect atrial fibrillation. J Hum Hypertens. 2009;23:654–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiesel J, Fitzig L, Herschman Y, Messineo F. Detection of atrial fibrillation using a modified microlife blood pressure monitor. Am J Hypertens. 2009;22:848–52.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiesel J, Wiesel D, Suri R, Messineo F. The use of a modified sphygmomanometer to detect atrial fibrillation in outpatients. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2004;27:639–43.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar