Wearables, Smartphones and Novel Anticoagulants: We Will Treat More Atrial Fibrillation, but Will Patients Be Better Off?

Adam Cifu, Vinay Prasad

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The widespread adoption of medical practices without a firm evidence base is common and the current growing enthusiasm for atrial fibrillation screening offers a real-time example of this phenomenon. Although no randomized trials supporting the utility of screening for atrial fibrillation exist, proponents suggest that such screening should be considered. Atrial fibrillation is a common condition that is often asymptomatic. It is also a condition associated with serious morbidity, primarily resulting from stroke. We practice at a time in which the ability to detect atrial fibrillation is becoming easier and treatments are becoming less onerous. Screening for atrial fibrillation may be beneficial but there is also a reasonable likelihood that its harms will outweigh it benefits. In this article we make the case that adopting this practice prior to data from randomized controlled trial would be a mistake. If screening for atrial fibrillation is adopted without such a robust evidence base we may well later discover that this course of action was wrong.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1-2
Number of pages2
JournalJournal of General Internal Medicine
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Jun 23 2016

Fingerprint

Anticoagulants
Atrial Fibrillation
Smartphone
Randomized Controlled Trials
Stroke
Morbidity

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Internal Medicine

Cite this

@article{e8891a731aed440d9a89ca4dfb08a5d1,
title = "Wearables, Smartphones and Novel Anticoagulants: We Will Treat More Atrial Fibrillation, but Will Patients Be Better Off?",
abstract = "The widespread adoption of medical practices without a firm evidence base is common and the current growing enthusiasm for atrial fibrillation screening offers a real-time example of this phenomenon. Although no randomized trials supporting the utility of screening for atrial fibrillation exist, proponents suggest that such screening should be considered. Atrial fibrillation is a common condition that is often asymptomatic. It is also a condition associated with serious morbidity, primarily resulting from stroke. We practice at a time in which the ability to detect atrial fibrillation is becoming easier and treatments are becoming less onerous. Screening for atrial fibrillation may be beneficial but there is also a reasonable likelihood that its harms will outweigh it benefits. In this article we make the case that adopting this practice prior to data from randomized controlled trial would be a mistake. If screening for atrial fibrillation is adopted without such a robust evidence base we may well later discover that this course of action was wrong.",
author = "Adam Cifu and Vinay Prasad",
year = "2016",
month = "6",
day = "23",
doi = "10.1007/s11606-016-3761-8",
language = "English (US)",
pages = "1--2",
journal = "Journal of General Internal Medicine",
issn = "0884-8734",
publisher = "Springer New York",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Wearables, Smartphones and Novel Anticoagulants

T2 - We Will Treat More Atrial Fibrillation, but Will Patients Be Better Off?

AU - Cifu, Adam

AU - Prasad, Vinay

PY - 2016/6/23

Y1 - 2016/6/23

N2 - The widespread adoption of medical practices without a firm evidence base is common and the current growing enthusiasm for atrial fibrillation screening offers a real-time example of this phenomenon. Although no randomized trials supporting the utility of screening for atrial fibrillation exist, proponents suggest that such screening should be considered. Atrial fibrillation is a common condition that is often asymptomatic. It is also a condition associated with serious morbidity, primarily resulting from stroke. We practice at a time in which the ability to detect atrial fibrillation is becoming easier and treatments are becoming less onerous. Screening for atrial fibrillation may be beneficial but there is also a reasonable likelihood that its harms will outweigh it benefits. In this article we make the case that adopting this practice prior to data from randomized controlled trial would be a mistake. If screening for atrial fibrillation is adopted without such a robust evidence base we may well later discover that this course of action was wrong.

AB - The widespread adoption of medical practices without a firm evidence base is common and the current growing enthusiasm for atrial fibrillation screening offers a real-time example of this phenomenon. Although no randomized trials supporting the utility of screening for atrial fibrillation exist, proponents suggest that such screening should be considered. Atrial fibrillation is a common condition that is often asymptomatic. It is also a condition associated with serious morbidity, primarily resulting from stroke. We practice at a time in which the ability to detect atrial fibrillation is becoming easier and treatments are becoming less onerous. Screening for atrial fibrillation may be beneficial but there is also a reasonable likelihood that its harms will outweigh it benefits. In this article we make the case that adopting this practice prior to data from randomized controlled trial would be a mistake. If screening for atrial fibrillation is adopted without such a robust evidence base we may well later discover that this course of action was wrong.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84976328523&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84976328523&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s11606-016-3761-8

DO - 10.1007/s11606-016-3761-8

M3 - Article

C2 - 27338593

AN - SCOPUS:84976328523

SP - 1

EP - 2

JO - Journal of General Internal Medicine

JF - Journal of General Internal Medicine

SN - 0884-8734

ER -