BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is common and associated with adverse health outcomes. Timely detection of AF can be challenging using traditional diagnostic tools. Smartphone use is increasing and may provide an inexpensive and user-friendly means to diagnoseAF. OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that a smartphone-based application could detect an irregular pulse fromAF. METHODS: Seventy-six adults with persistent AF were consented for participation in our study. We obtained pulsatile time series recordings before and after cardioversion using an iPhone 4S camera. A novel smartphone application conducted real-time pulse analysis using 2 statistical methods: root mean square of successive RR difference (RMSSD/mean) and Shannon entropy (ShE). We examined the sensitivity, specificity, and predictive accuracy of both algorithms using the 12-lead electrocardiogram as the gold standard. RESULTS: RMSDD/mean and ShE were higher in participants in AF than in those with sinus rhythm. The 2 methods were inversely related to AF in regression models adjusting for key factors including heart rate and blood pressure (beta coefficients per SD increment in RMSDD/mean and ShE were-0.20 and-0.35; P<.001). An algorithm combining the 2 statistical methods demonstrated excellent sensitivity (0.962), specificity (0.975), and accuracy (0.968) for beat-to-beat discrimination of an irregular pulse during AF from sinus rhythm. CONCLUSIONS: In a prospectively recruited cohort of 76 participants undergoing cardioversion for AF, we found that a novel algorithm analyzing signals recorded using an iPhone 4S accurately distinguished pulse recordings during AF from sinus rhythm. Data are needed to explore the performance and acceptability of smartphone-based applications for AF detection.
BACKGROUND:Atrial fibrillation (AF) is common and associated with adverse health outcomes. Timely detection of AF can be challenging using traditional diagnostic tools. Smartphone use is increasing and may provide an inexpensive and user-friendly means to diagnoseAF. OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that a smartphone-based application could detect an irregular pulse fromAF. METHODS: Seventy-six adults with persistent AF were consented for participation in our study. We obtained pulsatile time series recordings before and after cardioversion using an iPhone 4S camera. A novel smartphone application conducted real-time pulse analysis using 2 statistical methods: root mean square of successive RR difference (RMSSD/mean) and Shannon entropy (ShE). We examined the sensitivity, specificity, and predictive accuracy of both algorithms using the 12-lead electrocardiogram as the gold standard. RESULTS: RMSDD/mean and ShE were higher in participants in AF than in those with sinus rhythm. The 2 methods were inversely related to AF in regression models adjusting for key factors including heart rate and blood pressure (beta coefficients per SD increment in RMSDD/mean and ShE were-0.20 and-0.35; P<.001). An algorithm combining the 2 statistical methods demonstrated excellent sensitivity (0.962), specificity (0.975), and accuracy (0.968) for beat-to-beat discrimination of an irregular pulse during AF from sinus rhythm. CONCLUSIONS: In a prospectively recruited cohort of 76 participants undergoing cardioversion for AF, we found that a novel algorithm analyzing signals recorded using an iPhone 4S accurately distinguished pulse recordings during AF from sinus rhythm. Data are needed to explore the performance and acceptability of smartphone-based applications for AF detection.
Authors: V Fuster; L E Rydén; R W Asinger; D S Cannom; H J Crijns; R L Frye; J L Halperin; G N Kay; W W Klein; S Lévy; R L McNamara; E N Prystowsky; L S Wann; D G Wyse Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2001-10 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Christopher G Scully; Jinseok Lee; Joseph Meyer; Alexander M Gorbach; Domhnull Granquist-Fraser; Yitzhak Mendelson; Ki H Chon Journal: IEEE Trans Biomed Eng Date: 2011-07-29 Impact factor: 4.538
Authors: Emelia J Benjamin; Peng-Sheng Chen; Diane E Bild; Alice M Mascette; Christine M Albert; Alvaro Alonso; Hugh Calkins; Stuart J Connolly; Anne B Curtis; Dawood Darbar; Patrick T Ellinor; Alan S Go; Nora F Goldschlager; Susan R Heckbert; José Jalife; Charles R Kerr; Daniel Levy; Donald M Lloyd-Jones; Barry M Massie; Stanley Nattel; Jeffrey E Olgin; Douglas L Packer; Sunny S Po; Teresa S M Tsang; David R Van Wagoner; Albert L Waldo; D George Wyse Journal: Circulation Date: 2009-02-03 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Thomas J Wang; Martin G Larson; Daniel Levy; Ramachandran S Vasan; Eric P Leip; Philip A Wolf; Ralph B D'Agostino; Joanne M Murabito; William B Kannel; Emelia J Benjamin Journal: Circulation Date: 2003-05-27 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Emelia J Benjamin; Michael J Blaha; Stephanie E Chiuve; Mary Cushman; Sandeep R Das; Rajat Deo; Sarah D de Ferranti; James Floyd; Myriam Fornage; Cathleen Gillespie; Carmen R Isasi; Monik C Jiménez; Lori Chaffin Jordan; Suzanne E Judd; Daniel Lackland; Judith H Lichtman; Lynda Lisabeth; Simin Liu; Chris T Longenecker; Rachel H Mackey; Kunihiro Matsushita; Dariush Mozaffarian; Michael E Mussolino; Khurram Nasir; Robert W Neumar; Latha Palaniappan; Dilip K Pandey; Ravi R Thiagarajan; Mathew J Reeves; Matthew Ritchey; Carlos J Rodriguez; Gregory A Roth; Wayne D Rosamond; Comilla Sasson; Amytis Towfighi; Connie W Tsao; Melanie B Turner; Salim S Virani; Jenifer H Voeks; Joshua Z Willey; John T Wilkins; Jason Hy Wu; Heather M Alger; Sally S Wong; Paul Muntner Journal: Circulation Date: 2017-01-25 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: David D McMANUS; Jo Woon Chong; Apurv Soni; Jane S Saczynski; Nada Esa; Craig Napolitano; Chad E Darling; Edward Boyer; Rochelle K Rosen; Kevin C Floyd; Ki H Chon Journal: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol Date: 2015-11-13
Authors: Furrukh Sana; Eric M Isselbacher; Jagmeet P Singh; E Kevin Heist; Bhupesh Pathik; Antonis A Armoundas Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2020-04-07 Impact factor: 24.094