A systematic review and utilization study of digital stethoscopes for cardiopulmonary assessments

Abstract

Objectives: The demand for cardiopulmonary assessment via real-time live streaming is prevalent in remote communities of British Columbia, Canada. Digital stethoscopes enable remote assessments, but the difference in quality compared to conventional assessments is unknown. Objectives were to explore published literature for real-time remote audio and video streaming of cardiopulmonary assessments via digital stethoscopes, and evaluate the quality of digital stethoscopes for remote cardiopulmonary assessments as compared to conventional stethoscopes in a Cardiac Virtual health Assessments (CaViAs) project.

Materials and Methods: CaViAs included evaluation of quality and utility of three digital stethoscope devices, three digital platforms/applications, three noise-cancelling headsets, and two Internet-enabled devices with one technical operator and one evaluator. A comprehensive search for “digital stethoscope*” was conducted in PubMed, Science Direct, CINAHL, TRIP, Open Grey and ClinicalTrials.gov in February 2021 for relevant peer reviewed studies. Studies were screened for eligibility and inclusion based on population, intervention, comparator, outcome and study design criteria and utilizing Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis, and assessed for methodological quality using Critical Appraisal Skills Programme for Randomized Controlled Trials. Studies were eligible if they included adult humans undergoing cardiopulmonary assessment with digital stethoscopes compared to conventional stethoscopes to test the audio quality and ease of use of digital stethoscopes via real-time remote audio and video streaming across a distance.

Results: Of 238 articles identified, only one study of poor methodological quality was found that fulfilled all inclusion criteria. This study rated the quality of digital stethoscopes as good or very good. In the CaViAs project, the Eko Duo digital stethoscope in combination with the Eko ECG application, streamed between two Cisco DX 80 devices, and using the Plantronics Voyager 8200 performed the best. Limitations included having only one reviewer for title and abstract screening and data extraction; hearing is subjective; a validated tool for quality testing was not used; and auscultation in general has several limitations.

Conclusion: There is a gap in literature to help inform decision-making in choosing digital stethoscopes that are best for real-time virtual remote outreach for cardiopulmonary assessments. For best results, digital stethoscopes should be used in conjunction with equipment that optimize audio and ease of use.

This article was published by Scientific Scholar and has been archived here. DOI of the article is 10.25259/JMRI_2_2021.

References

1. World Health Organization. The top 10 causes of death globally: WHO; 2020 [Available from: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/the-top-10-causes-of-death.
2. Montinari MR, Minelli S. The first 200 years of cardiac auscultation and future perspectives. J Multidiscip Healthc 2019;12:183–9. PubMed PMID: 30881010. PMCID: PMC6408918. Epub 2019/03/19. eng.
3. Conn RD, O’Keefe JH. Cardiac physical diagnosis in the digital age: an important but increasingly neglected skill (from stethoscopes to microchips). Am J Cardiol 2009;104:590–5. PubMed PMID: 19660617. Epub 2009/08/08. eng.
4. Tavel ME. Cardiac auscultation: a glorious past--and it does have a future! Circulation 2006;113:1255–9. PubMed PMID: 16520426. Epub 2006/03/08. eng.
5. Michard F. A sneak peek into digital innovations and wearable sensors for cardiac monitoring. J Clin Monit Comput 2017;31:253–9. PubMed PMID: 27566472. Epub 2016/08/28. eng.
6. Prieto-Egido I, Simó-Reigadas J, Liñán-Benítez L, García- Giganto V, Martínez-Fernández A. Telemedicine networks of EHAS foundation in Latin America. Front Public Health 2014;2:188. PubMed PMID: 25360436. PMCID: PMC4197650. Epub 2014/11/02. eng.
7. Rhaj A, Kannan A, John P. Digital technology interventions in cardiovascular diseases & diabetes mellitus. Journalism 2010;11:369–73.
8. Swarup S, Makaryus AN. Digital stethoscope: technology update. Med Devices (Auckland) 2018;11:29–36. PubMed PMID: 29379321. PMCID: PMC5757962. Epub 2018/01/31. eng.
9. Araj FG, Cox J. Readers’ comments the digital stethoscope - two senses are better than one. Am J Cardiol 2019;124:822–3. PubMed PMID: 31270032. Epub 2019/07/05. eng.
10. Kitsiou S, Paré G, Jaana M. Effects of home telemonitoring interventions on patients with chronic heart failure: an overview of systematic reviews. J Med Internet Res 2015;17:e63. PubMed PMID: 25768664. PMCID: PMC4376138. Epub 2015/03/15. eng.
11. Qureshi RO, Kokkirala A, Wu WC. Review of telehealth solutions for outpatient heart failure care in a veterans health affairs hospital in the COVID-19 era. R I Med J (2013) 2020;103:22–5. PubMed PMID: 33126782. Epub 2020/11/01. eng.
12. Thompson SC, Nedkoff L, Katzenellenbogen J, Hussain MA, Sanfilippo F. Challenges in managing acute cardiovascular diseases and follow up care in rural areas: a narrative review. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2019;16. PubMed PMID: 31847490. PMCID: PMC6950682. Epub 2019/12/19. eng.
13. Garcia B, Cortazar F, Gallego M, Hines A. Assessment of QoE for video and audio in WebRTC applications using full-reference models. Electronics 2020;9:462.
14. Laghari A, Laghari R, Wagan A, Umrani A. Effect of packet loss and reorder on quality of audio streaming. EAI 2019;7:e4.
15. Reddy C, Cutler R, Gehrke J. Supervised classifiers for audio impairments with noisy labels. Redmond, WA: Microsoft Corporation.
16. Roychoudhuri L, Al-Shaer E, Hamed H, Brewster G. Audio transmission over the Internet: experiments and observations*. IEEE International Conference on Communications; Anchorage, AK; 2003. p. 552–6.
17. Bruce N, Pope D, Stanistreet D. Quantitative methods for health research: a practical interactive guide to epidemiology and statistics, Second Edition. Oxford, UK: John Wiley & Sons; 2018. p. 556.
18. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 2009;6:e1000097. PubMed PMID: 19621072. PMCID: PMC2707599. Epub 2009/07/22. eng.
19. CASP. CASP Randomised Controlled Trial Standard Checklist: Critical Appraisal Skills Programme; 2020 [Available from: https://casp-uk.net/casp-tools-checklists/.
20. Foche-Perez I, Ramirez-Payba R, Hirigoyen-Emparanza G, Balducci-Gonzalez F, Simo-Reigadas FJ, Seoane-Pascual J, et al. An open real-time tele-stethoscopy system. Biomed Eng Online 2012;11:57. PubMed PMID: 22917062. PMCID: PMC3499164. Epub 2012/08/25. eng.
21. Chowdhury MEH, Khandakar A, Alzoubi K, Mansoor S, A MT, Reaz MBI, et al. Real-time smart-digital stethoscope system for heart diseases monitoring. Sensors (Basel) 2019;19. PubMed PMID: 31226869. PMCID: PMC6630694. Epub 2019/06/23. eng.
22. Fattah S, Rahman N, Maksud A, Foysal S. Stetho-phone: low-cost digital stethoscope for remote personalized healthcare. IEEE J Transl Eng Health Med 2017:1–7.
23. Ghaemmaghami H, Hussain N, Tran K, Carey A, Hussain S, Syed F, et al. Automatic segmentation and classification of cardiac cycles using deep learning and a wireless electronic stethoscope. IEEE J Transl Eng Health Med 2017:1–4.
24. Hoffmann C, Falzone E, Verret C, Pasquier P, Leclerc T, Donat N, et al. Brief report: pulmonary auscultation in the operating room: a prospective randomized blinded trial comparing electronic and conventional stethoscopes. Anesthes Analges 2013;117:646–8. PubMed PMID: 23868885. Epub 2013/07/23. eng.
25. Høyte H, Jensen T, Gjesdal K. Cardiac auscultation training of medical students: a comparison of electronic sensor-based and acoustic stethoscopes. BMC Med Edu 2005;5:14. PubMed PMID: 15882458. PMCID: PMC1131903. Epub 2005/05/11. eng.
26. Iversen K, Greibe R, Timm HB, Skovgaard LT, Dalsgaard M, Hendriksen KV, et al. A randomized trial comparing electronic and conventional stethoscopes. Am J Med 2005;118:1289. PubMed PMID: 16271920. Epub 2005/11/08. eng.
27. Kalinauskienė E, Razvadauskas H, Morse DJ, Maxey GE, Naudžiūnas A. A comparison of electronic and traditional stethoscopes in the heart auscultation of obese patients. Medicina (Kaunas) 2019;55:94. PubMed PMID: 30959832. PMCID: PMC6524010. Epub 2019/04/10. eng.
28. Kelmenson DA, Heath JK, Ball SA, Kaafarani HM, Baker EM, Yeh DD, et al. Prototype electronic stethoscope vs. conventional stethoscope for auscultation of heart sounds. J Med Eng Technol 2014;38:307–10. PubMed PMID: 24939853. Epub 2014/06/19. eng.
29. Legget ME, Toh M, Meintjes A, Fitzsimons S, Gamble G, Doughty RN. Digital devices for teaching cardiac auscultation - a randomized pilot study. Med Edu Online 2018;23:1524688. PubMed PMID: 30499380. PMCID: PMC6282469. Epub 2018/12/01. eng.
30. Makaryus AN, Makaryus JN, Figgatt A, Mulholland D, Kushner H, Semmlow JL, et al. Utility of an advanced digital electronic stethoscope in the diagnosis of coronary artery disease compared with coronary computed tomographic angiography. Am J Cardiol 2013;111:786–92. PubMed PMID: 23290309. Epub 2013/01/08. eng.
31. Mesquita CT, Reis JC, Simões LS, Moura EC, Rodrigues GA, Athayde CC, et al. Digital stethoscope as an innovative tool on the teaching of auscultatory skills. Arq Bras Cardiol 2013;100:187–9. PubMed PMID: 23503829. Epub 2013/03/19. eng por.
32. Sharma P, Newman K, Long CS, Gasiewski AJ, Barnes F. Use of wavelet transform to detect compensated and decompensated stages in the congestive heart failure patient. Biosensors (Basel) 2017;7. PubMed PMID: 28930184. PMCID: PMC5618046. Epub 2017/09/21. eng.
33. Silverman B, Balk M. Digital stethoscope-improved auscultation at the bedside. Am J Cardiol 2019;123:984–5. PubMed PMID: 30630590. Epub 2019/01/12. eng.
34. Baptista R, Silva H, Rocha M. Design and development of a digital stethoscope encapsulation for simultaneous acquisition of phonocardiography and electrocardiography signals: the Smart Heart case study. J Med Eng Technol 2020;44:153–61. PubMed PMID: 32401568. Epub 2020/05/14. eng.
35. White B, Shapiro A, Kanzawa M, Venkatraman S, Paek J, Pham S, et al. Abstract 13831: Handheld wireless digital phonocardiography for machine learning-based detection of mitral regurgitation. Circulation 2019;140.
36. Zühlke L, Myer L, Mayosi BM. The promise of computer-assisted auscultation in screening for structural heart disease and clinical teaching. Cardiovasc J Afr 2012;23:405–8. PubMed PMID: 22358127. PMCID: PMC3721800. Epub 2012/02/24. eng.
37. Lo F, Meng M, editors. A low cost bluetooth powered wearable digital stethoscope for cardiac murmur. IEEE International Conference on Information and Automation; 2016; 16 August; Ningbo, China.
38. Lakhe A, Sodhi I, Warrier J, Sinha V. Development of digital stethoscope for telemedicine. J Med Eng Technol 2016;40:20–4.
39. Sinharay A, Ghosh D, Dehspande P, Alam S, Banerjee R, Pal A, et al. Smartphone based digital stethoscope for connected health - a direct acoustic coupling technique. IEEE First Conference on Connected Health: Applications, Systems and Engineering Technologies 2016. p. 193–8.
40. Ertel PY, Lawrence M, Song W. How to test stethoscopes. Med Res Eng 1969;8:7–17. PubMed PMID: 5765901. Epub 1969/01/01. eng.
41. Lam MZ, Lee TJ, Boey PY, Ng WF, Hey HW, Ho KY, et al. Factors influencing cardiac auscultation proficiency in physician trainees. Singapore Med J 2005;46:11–4. PubMed PMID: 15633002. Epub 2005/01/06. eng.
42. Mangione S. Cardiac auscultatory skills of physicians-in-training: a comparison of three English-speaking countries. Am J Med 2001;110:210–6. PubMed PMID: 11182108. Epub 2001/02/22. eng.
43. Mangione S, Nieman LZ. Cardiac auscultatory skills of internal medicine and family practice trainees. A comparison of diagnostic proficiency. JAMA 1997;278:717–22. PubMed PMID: 9286830. Epub 1997/09/03. eng.
44. Belloni F, Giustina D, Riva M, Malcangi M. A new digital stethoscope with environmental noise cancellation. Advances in Mathemathical and Computational Methods 201.
45. Guven M, Hardalac R, Ozisik K, Tuna F. Heart diseases diagnose via artificial intelligence-powered mobile application. Preprintsorg 2021:1–10.
46. Thoenes M, Agarwal A, Grundmann D, Ferrero C, McDonald A, Bramlage P, et al. Narrative review of the role of artificial intelligence to improve aortic valve disease management. J Thorac Dis 2021;13:396–404. PubMed PMID: 33569220. PMCID: PMC7867819. Epub 2021/02/12. eng

Comments & Peer Review