Arrhythmias & electrophysiologyRandomised controlled trial
Population reach and participation rate in opportunistic vs. systematic atrial fibrillation screening: STROKESTOP III
- Cluster-randomised trial
- 16 primary care centres
Authors' conclusion
Opportunistic screening increased participation among invited individuals and identified a higher-risk population, but its overall population reach was limited by incomplete eligibility assessment.
Study context
- Population
- Individuals aged 75–76 years, primary care centres in Region Värmland, Sweden
- Participants
- 1,390 vs 1,312
- Comparison
- Opportunistic vs systematic atrial fibrillation (AF) screening
- Opportunisticn = 1,390
- Systematicn = 1,312reference
- Primary endpoint
- Participation in AF screening
Primary result
As reported in the abstract
Participation among invited eligible individuals
P < 0.005
Further findings
Overall population reach
P < 0.005
denominator Systematic 1,437 · Opportunistic 1,479
- Overall population reach: lower reach with opportunistic, due to incomplete assessment for invitation
CV risk burden of participants
- Opportunistic participants had higher CV risk burden (more hypertension, diabetes); CHA2DS2-VASc score opportunistic vs systematic
- 3.99 vs. 3.60; P < 0.005
Exclusion rates
- Exclusion rates higher with opportunistic vs systematic screening, mainly due to previously diagnosed AF and cognitive impairment
- 18.7% vs. 8.7%; P < 0.005
Original publication
Population reach and participation rate in opportunistic vs. systematic atrial fibrillation screening: STROKESTOP III. Europace. Published 30 August 2026. doi:10.1093/europace/euag214
Summarised from the published abstract; every number is checked against it