TY - JOUR
T1 - Mobile health solutions for atrial fibrillation detection and management
T2 - a systematic review
AU - Hermans, Astrid N. L.
AU - Gawalko, Monika
AU - Dohmen, Lisa
AU - van der Velden, Rachel M. J.
AU - Betz, Konstanze
AU - Duncker, David
AU - Verhaert, Dominique V. M.
AU - Heidbuchel, Hein
AU - Svennberg, Emma
AU - Neubeck, Lis
AU - Eckstein, Jens
AU - Lane, Deirdre A.
AU - Lip, Gregory Y. H.
AU - Crijns, Harry J. G. M.
AU - Sanders, Prashanthan
AU - Hendriks, Jeroen M.
AU - Pluymaekers, Nikki A. H. A.
AU - Linz, Dominik
PY - 2022
Y1 - 2022
N2 - Aim We aimed to systematically review the available literature on mobile Health (mHealth) solutions, including handheld and wearable devices, implantable loop recorders (ILRs), as well as mobile platforms and support systems in atrial fibrillation (AF) detection and management.Methods This systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The electronic databases PubMed (NCBI), Embase (Ovid), and Cochrane were searched for articles published until 10 February 2021, inclusive. Given that the included studies varied widely in their design, interventions, comparators, and outcomes, no synthesis was undertaken, and we undertook a narrative review.Results We found 208 studies, which were deemed potentially relevant. Of these studies included, 82, 46, and 49 studies aimed at validating handheld devices, wearables, and ILRs for AF detection and/or management, respectively, while 34 studies assessed mobile platforms/support systems. The diagnostic accuracy of mHealth solutions differs with respect to the type (handheld devices vs wearables vs ILRs) and technology used (electrocardiography vs photoplethysmography), as well as application setting (intermittent vs continuous, spot vs longitudinal assessment), and study population.Conclusion While the use of mHealth solutions in the detection and management of AF is becoming increasingly popular, its clinical implications merit further investigation and several barriers to widespread mHealth adaption in healthcare systems need to be overcome.
AB - Aim We aimed to systematically review the available literature on mobile Health (mHealth) solutions, including handheld and wearable devices, implantable loop recorders (ILRs), as well as mobile platforms and support systems in atrial fibrillation (AF) detection and management.Methods This systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The electronic databases PubMed (NCBI), Embase (Ovid), and Cochrane were searched for articles published until 10 February 2021, inclusive. Given that the included studies varied widely in their design, interventions, comparators, and outcomes, no synthesis was undertaken, and we undertook a narrative review.Results We found 208 studies, which were deemed potentially relevant. Of these studies included, 82, 46, and 49 studies aimed at validating handheld devices, wearables, and ILRs for AF detection and/or management, respectively, while 34 studies assessed mobile platforms/support systems. The diagnostic accuracy of mHealth solutions differs with respect to the type (handheld devices vs wearables vs ILRs) and technology used (electrocardiography vs photoplethysmography), as well as application setting (intermittent vs continuous, spot vs longitudinal assessment), and study population.Conclusion While the use of mHealth solutions in the detection and management of AF is becoming increasingly popular, its clinical implications merit further investigation and several barriers to widespread mHealth adaption in healthcare systems need to be overcome.
KW - Atrial fibrillation
KW - mHealth
KW - Systematic review
U2 - 10.1007/s00392-021-01941-9
DO - 10.1007/s00392-021-01941-9
M3 - Review
C2 - 34549333
SN - 1861-0684
VL - 111
SP - 479
EP - 491
JO - Clinical Research in Cardiology
JF - Clinical Research in Cardiology
ER -