Lung auscultation using smartphone built-in microphone versus digital stethoscope: a comparative early feasibility study.

IF 1 Q3 PEDIATRICS
Beatriz Baptista, Inês Pais-Cunha, Rita Amaral, Pedro Vieira-Marques, José Valente, Rute Almeida, Cristina Costa-Santos, Inês Azevedo, João A Fonseca, Manuel Ferreira-Magalhães, Cristina Jácome
{"title":"Lung auscultation using smartphone built-in microphone versus digital stethoscope: a comparative early feasibility study.","authors":"Beatriz Baptista, Inês Pais-Cunha, Rita Amaral, Pedro Vieira-Marques, José Valente, Rute Almeida, Cristina Costa-Santos, Inês Azevedo, João A Fonseca, Manuel Ferreira-Magalhães, Cristina Jácome","doi":"10.23736/S2724-5276.24.07657-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Lung auscultation using a smartphone built-in microphone is promising for home monitoring of pediatric respiratory diseases. Our aim was to compare respiratory sounds recorded by a smartphone and a digital stethoscope by assessing the proportion of quality recordings and adventitious sounds detected by each device.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comparative early feasibility study with children from a public school in Northern Portugal was conducted. Lung auscultation was performed at 7 locations (trachea, anterior superior, posterior superior, and posterior inferior regions of both hemithoraces). Two researchers recorded lung auscultation simultaneously with a smartphone and a digital stethoscope, and independently classified recordings regarding their quality (at least one respiratory cycle audible with minimal artefacts) and presence of adventitious sounds. A third researcher resolved the disagreements. Proportions of sounds with quality and with adventitious sounds were compared between devices using chi-square tests. Inter-device agreement was also assessed with proportion of agreement and Cohen kappa.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-seven children (20 male, 10.2±0.6 years) were enrolled, 8 had self-reported asthma. A total of 378 respiratory sounds (smartphone N.=190, digital stethoscope N.=188 [2 missing]) were recorded. The percentage of recordings with quality was high in both devices (93% smartphone vs. 97% digital stethoscope, P=0.065). Adventitious sounds were identified in 11% and 19% of the recordings acquired with smartphone and digital stethoscope, respectively (P=0.021). The overall inter-device proportion of agreement for the presence of adventitious sounds was 90% (kappa 0.60, 95%CI 0.42, 0.77).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Smartphone lung auscultation seems to be a viable technology for recording respiratory sounds and identifying adventitious sounds in children. Further research is needed to validate its potential for effective remote respiratory disease monitoring.</p>","PeriodicalId":56337,"journal":{"name":"Minerva Pediatrics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Minerva Pediatrics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23736/S2724-5276.24.07657-2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Lung auscultation using a smartphone built-in microphone is promising for home monitoring of pediatric respiratory diseases. Our aim was to compare respiratory sounds recorded by a smartphone and a digital stethoscope by assessing the proportion of quality recordings and adventitious sounds detected by each device.

Methods: A comparative early feasibility study with children from a public school in Northern Portugal was conducted. Lung auscultation was performed at 7 locations (trachea, anterior superior, posterior superior, and posterior inferior regions of both hemithoraces). Two researchers recorded lung auscultation simultaneously with a smartphone and a digital stethoscope, and independently classified recordings regarding their quality (at least one respiratory cycle audible with minimal artefacts) and presence of adventitious sounds. A third researcher resolved the disagreements. Proportions of sounds with quality and with adventitious sounds were compared between devices using chi-square tests. Inter-device agreement was also assessed with proportion of agreement and Cohen kappa.

Results: Twenty-seven children (20 male, 10.2±0.6 years) were enrolled, 8 had self-reported asthma. A total of 378 respiratory sounds (smartphone N.=190, digital stethoscope N.=188 [2 missing]) were recorded. The percentage of recordings with quality was high in both devices (93% smartphone vs. 97% digital stethoscope, P=0.065). Adventitious sounds were identified in 11% and 19% of the recordings acquired with smartphone and digital stethoscope, respectively (P=0.021). The overall inter-device proportion of agreement for the presence of adventitious sounds was 90% (kappa 0.60, 95%CI 0.42, 0.77).

Conclusions: Smartphone lung auscultation seems to be a viable technology for recording respiratory sounds and identifying adventitious sounds in children. Further research is needed to validate its potential for effective remote respiratory disease monitoring.

使用智能手机内置麦克风与数字听诊器进行肺部听诊:早期可行性对比研究。
背景:使用内置麦克风的智能手机进行肺听诊,有望用于儿科呼吸系统疾病的家庭监测。我们的目的是比较智能手机和数字听诊器记录的呼吸声音,通过评估每种设备检测到的优质录音和外来声音的比例。方法:对葡萄牙北部一所公立学校的儿童进行早期可行性比较研究。在7个位置(气管、前上、后上、后下)行肺听诊。两名研究人员用智能手机和数字听诊器同时记录肺听诊,并根据其质量(至少一个呼吸周期可听到,伪音最小)和外来声音的存在独立分类。第三位研究者解决了分歧。使用卡方检验比较设备之间具有质量和非定音的声音比例。采用协议比例和科恩卡帕法评估设备间协议。结果:纳入27例儿童(男性20例,年龄10.2±0.6岁),其中8例自报哮喘。共记录呼吸音378个,其中智能手机n =190个,数字听诊器n =188个[缺失2个]。两种设备的录音质量百分比都很高(93%的智能手机对97%的数字听诊器,P=0.065)。通过智能手机和数字听诊器获得的录音中,分别有11%和19%识别出了非固定声音(P=0.021)。总体设备间对外音存在的一致性比例为90% (kappa 0.60, 95%CI 0.42, 0.77)。结论:智能手机肺听诊似乎是一种可行的技术,用于记录呼吸声音和识别儿童的非定音。需要进一步的研究来验证其在有效的远程呼吸疾病监测方面的潜力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
294
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信