Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Introduction: It is unknown whether monitors that include atrial fibrillation recognition software (AF-RS) increase the rate of early atrial fibrillation (AF) detection in acute stroke. We aimed to evaluate the AF detection rate of an AF-RS monitor and compare it with standard monitoring.
Methods: This was a retrospective, single-centre observational study conducted on consecutive patients with acute transient ischaemic attack or brain infarction attended in a stroke unit (SU) with six beds. Five beds had a standard monitor with a three-lead electrocardiogram (ECG)-tracing monitor that did not automatically detect AF, and one bed had a 12-lead ECG monitor with integrated AF-RS. All patients were monitored for at least 24 h and underwent a daily ECG during their stay in the SU. In case of unknown stroke aetiology, the patients underwent 24 h Holter monitoring.
Results: A total of 76 patients were included: 59 patients in the standard monitor group and 17 patients in the AF-RS monitor group. The mean age was 72.11 (±13.09) years, and 59.2% were men. A total of 20 new cases of AF were identified. The AF-RS monitor showed a higher rate of AF detection than the standard devices (57.1% vs 7.7%, p=0.031). The AF-RS monitor showed sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive values of 57.1%, 100%, 100% and 76.9%, respectively. For the standard monitors, these values were 7.7%, 100%, 100% and 79.3%, respectively.
Conclusion: The monitor with AF-RS demonstrated a higher detection rate for AF than standard ECG monitoring in acute stroke patients in a SU.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1474515114552043 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!