Prevalence of atrial fibrillation in a regional Victoria setting, findings from the crossroads studies (2001-2003 and 2016-2018).
Kristen Glenister, Leslie Bolitho, Lisa Bourke and 1 others
PMID 35938603WHAT IT FOUND
Atrial fibrillation prevalence was 1.8% in Crossroads-I and 2.0% in Crossroads-II in rural Victoria, with no significant difference 15 years apart despite higher risk factors.
Key findings
01Atrial fibrillation crude prevalence was 1.8% (19/1035) in Crossroads-I and 2.0% (14/715) in Crossroads-II.
02Age-standardised prevalence did not differ significantly between the two studies (1.6% vs 1.8%; p = 0.375).
03In Crossroads-II, 64.3% of detected AF cases had high CHADS-2 scores, but only one participant was taking warfarin and one another oral anticoagulant.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for RNs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study used self-reported health conditions and medications, so recall bias is possible. A cross-sectional design cannot show that risk factors caused AF. A single time-point ECG screen can miss paroxysmal AF. The two studies used different AF screening methods, so direct prevalence comparisons are limited. The number of AF cases was small, limiting risk-profile analysis. Because participation required two steps, overall response was lower and may affect representativeness.
Declared interests
The authors declared no conflicts of interest. The study was funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read the unchanged prevalence as proof that rural AF risk is stable. The two studies used different ECG methods, and a single time-point screen can miss paroxysmal AF.