Comparison of two smartphone based atrial fibrillation screening application in Indonesian population

A. E. Tondas, Rolando Agustian Halim, Muhammad Rizki Felani, Fianirazha Primesa Caesarani, Indash Puspita, Mangiring P L Toruan
{"title":"Comparison of two smartphone based atrial fibrillation screening application in Indonesian population","authors":"A. E. Tondas, Rolando Agustian Halim, Muhammad Rizki Felani, Fianirazha Primesa Caesarani, Indash Puspita, Mangiring P L Toruan","doi":"10.30701/IJC.1066","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Due to its adverse outcomes and thromboembolic complications, early detection of atrial fibrillation (AF) is advisable in the general population. This study aims to compare the diagnostic ability of two distinct method in smartphone application format, namely : AliveCor KardiaMobile and FibriCheck. \nMethods: This study was conducted in Mohammad Hospital General Hospital Palembang with convenience sampling of 170 participants aged 18 years or older. The subjects underwent Fibricheck and KardiaMobile recordings followed by 12 lead electrocardiogram read by board-certified cardiologist as the diagnostic standard. \nResults: After the exclusion of previous pacemaker implantation (n=7), 163 patients were included in the study. The mean age was 51±15 years with gender distribution of 74.8% men and 25.2% women. Most of the subjects were asymptomatic (87.1%) with mean blood pressure of 130/80 mmHg. The Fibricheck readings showed sensitivity of 73% and specificity of 93%, meanwhile Kardiamobile was able to detect AF with sensitivity of 77% and specificity of 98%.  \nConclusion: In our study, KardiaMobile demonstrated overall greater sensitivity and specificity when compared to FibriCheck. However, KardiaMobile requires an external metal sensor that must be puchased separately. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to directly compare both methods in the Indonesian population.","PeriodicalId":32916,"journal":{"name":"Majalah Kardiologi Indonesia","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Majalah Kardiologi Indonesia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30701/IJC.1066","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: Due to its adverse outcomes and thromboembolic complications, early detection of atrial fibrillation (AF) is advisable in the general population. This study aims to compare the diagnostic ability of two distinct method in smartphone application format, namely : AliveCor KardiaMobile and FibriCheck. Methods: This study was conducted in Mohammad Hospital General Hospital Palembang with convenience sampling of 170 participants aged 18 years or older. The subjects underwent Fibricheck and KardiaMobile recordings followed by 12 lead electrocardiogram read by board-certified cardiologist as the diagnostic standard. Results: After the exclusion of previous pacemaker implantation (n=7), 163 patients were included in the study. The mean age was 51±15 years with gender distribution of 74.8% men and 25.2% women. Most of the subjects were asymptomatic (87.1%) with mean blood pressure of 130/80 mmHg. The Fibricheck readings showed sensitivity of 73% and specificity of 93%, meanwhile Kardiamobile was able to detect AF with sensitivity of 77% and specificity of 98%.  Conclusion: In our study, KardiaMobile demonstrated overall greater sensitivity and specificity when compared to FibriCheck. However, KardiaMobile requires an external metal sensor that must be puchased separately. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to directly compare both methods in the Indonesian population.
两种智能手机心房颤动筛查在印度尼西亚人群中的应用比较
背景:由于其不良后果和血栓栓塞并发症,在一般人群中早期发现心房颤动(AF)是可取的。本研究旨在比较两种不同的方法在智能手机应用程序格式的诊断能力,即:AliveCor KardiaMobile和FibriCheck。方法:本研究在穆罕默德医院综合医院进行,方便抽样170名18岁及以上的参与者。受试者接受Fibricheck和KardiaMobile记录,随后由委员会认证的心脏病专家阅读12导联心电图作为诊断标准。结果:排除既往起搏器植入后(n=7), 163例患者纳入研究。平均年龄51±15岁,男性占74.8%,女性占25.2%。大多数受试者无症状(87.1%),平均血压为130/80 mmHg。Fibricheck检测的灵敏度为73%,特异性为93%,而Kardiamobile检测AF的灵敏度为77%,特异性为98%。结论:在我们的研究中,与FibriCheck相比,KardiaMobile表现出更高的敏感性和特异性。然而,KardiaMobile需要一个必须单独购买的外部金属传感器。据我们所知,这是第一个在印度尼西亚人口中直接比较这两种方法的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信