Performance of an electronic health record-based predictive model to identify patients with atrial fibrillation across countries.

BackgroundAtrial fibrillation (AF) burden on patients and healthcare systems warrants innovative strategies for screening asymptomatic individuals.ObjectiveWe sought to externally validate a predictive model originally developed in a German population to detect unidentified incident AF utilising real-world primary healthcare databases from countries in Europe and Australia.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study used anonymized, longitudinal patient data from 5 country-level primary care databases, including Australia, Belgium, France, Germany, and the UK. The study eligibility included adult patients (≥45 years) with either an AF diagnosis (cases) or no diagnosis (controls) who had continuous enrolment in the respective database prior to the study period. Logistic regression was fitted to a binary response (yes/no) for AF diagnosis using pre-determined risk factors.ResultsAF patients were from Germany (n = 63,562), the UK (n = 42,652), France (n = 7,213), Australia (n = 2,753), and Belgium (n = 1,371). Cases were more likely to have hypertension or other cardiac conditions than controls in all validation datasets compared to the model development data. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve in the validation datasets ranged from 0.79 (Belgium) to 0.84 (Germany), comparable to the German study model, which had an area under the curve of 0.83. Most validation sets reported similar specificity at approximately 80% sensitivity, ranging from 67% (France) to 71% (United Kingdom). The positive predictive value (PPV) ranged from 2% (Belgium) to 16% (Germany), and the number needed to be screened was 50 in Belgium and 6 in Germany. The prevalence of AF varied widely between these datasets, which may be related to different coding practices. Low prevalence affected PPV, but not sensitivity, specificity, and ROC curves.ConclusionsAF risk prediction algorithms offer targeted ways to identify patients using electronic health records, which could improve screening number and the cost-effectiveness of AF screening if implemented in clinical practice