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.