Cargando…

Frequency Responses of Conventional and Amplified Stethoscopes for Measuring Heart Sounds

BACKGROUND: Frequencies of normal and abnormal heart sounds have previously been reported, but the acoustic analyses of the frequency responses of conventional and amplified stethoscopes for different heart sounds have not yet been reported. OBJECTIVES: To compare the acoustic analysis of frequency...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Alanazi, Ahmad A., Atcherson, Samuel R., Franklin, Clifford A., Bryan, Melinda F.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7305673/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32587492
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/sjmms.sjmms_118_19
_version_ 1783548513006649344
author Alanazi, Ahmad A.
Atcherson, Samuel R.
Franklin, Clifford A.
Bryan, Melinda F.
author_facet Alanazi, Ahmad A.
Atcherson, Samuel R.
Franklin, Clifford A.
Bryan, Melinda F.
author_sort Alanazi, Ahmad A.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Frequencies of normal and abnormal heart sounds have previously been reported, but the acoustic analyses of the frequency responses of conventional and amplified stethoscopes for different heart sounds have not yet been reported. OBJECTIVES: To compare the acoustic analysis of frequency responses of three stethoscopes (conventional and amplified) for measuring simulated heart sounds. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This exploratory study used Starkey SLI-ST3, Cardionics E-Scope II (both electronic) and Littmann Classic S.E. II (conventional) stethoscopes, as they share the same basic design with twin ear tubes coupled to ear tips and chest piece options (bell vs. diaphragm modes). Acoustic analyses using the diaphragm were performed in a soundproof booth and frequency response curves at 85 (the largest), 250, 400, 550 and 1050 Hz were compared for three different digitized heart sound simulations: normal, aortic valvular stenosis (AVS) and pulmonic valvular stenosis. RESULTS: Amplified stethoscopes provided the most amplification of normal and abnormal heart sounds across all five frequencies compared with the conventional stethoscope. The Starkey SLI-ST3 stethoscope was better at amplifying normal heartbeats than the Cardionics E-Scope II and Littman Classic S.E. II; however, it came last for amplifying normal heartbeats of ~85 Hz. Cardionics E-Scope II had advantages in amplifying abnormal heartbeats (i.e., aortic valvular stenosis and pulmonic valvular stenosis) over the other two stethoscopes. CONCLUSION: This study showed that amplified stethoscopes provided better amplification of normal and abnormal heart sounds across the five measured frequencies. Therefore, health professionals should interpret manufacturer claims regarding gain (dB) and frequency (Hz) with caution, and those with hearing loss should carefully investigate the “audio performance” of the stethoscopes. Future research should focus on these effects through coupling with hearing aids.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7305673
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73056732020-06-24 Frequency Responses of Conventional and Amplified Stethoscopes for Measuring Heart Sounds Alanazi, Ahmad A. Atcherson, Samuel R. Franklin, Clifford A. Bryan, Melinda F. Saudi J Med Med Sci Original Article BACKGROUND: Frequencies of normal and abnormal heart sounds have previously been reported, but the acoustic analyses of the frequency responses of conventional and amplified stethoscopes for different heart sounds have not yet been reported. OBJECTIVES: To compare the acoustic analysis of frequency responses of three stethoscopes (conventional and amplified) for measuring simulated heart sounds. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This exploratory study used Starkey SLI-ST3, Cardionics E-Scope II (both electronic) and Littmann Classic S.E. II (conventional) stethoscopes, as they share the same basic design with twin ear tubes coupled to ear tips and chest piece options (bell vs. diaphragm modes). Acoustic analyses using the diaphragm were performed in a soundproof booth and frequency response curves at 85 (the largest), 250, 400, 550 and 1050 Hz were compared for three different digitized heart sound simulations: normal, aortic valvular stenosis (AVS) and pulmonic valvular stenosis. RESULTS: Amplified stethoscopes provided the most amplification of normal and abnormal heart sounds across all five frequencies compared with the conventional stethoscope. The Starkey SLI-ST3 stethoscope was better at amplifying normal heartbeats than the Cardionics E-Scope II and Littman Classic S.E. II; however, it came last for amplifying normal heartbeats of ~85 Hz. Cardionics E-Scope II had advantages in amplifying abnormal heartbeats (i.e., aortic valvular stenosis and pulmonic valvular stenosis) over the other two stethoscopes. CONCLUSION: This study showed that amplified stethoscopes provided better amplification of normal and abnormal heart sounds across the five measured frequencies. Therefore, health professionals should interpret manufacturer claims regarding gain (dB) and frequency (Hz) with caution, and those with hearing loss should carefully investigate the “audio performance” of the stethoscopes. Future research should focus on these effects through coupling with hearing aids. Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2020 2020-04-17 /pmc/articles/PMC7305673/ /pubmed/32587492 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/sjmms.sjmms_118_19 Text en Copyright: © 2020 Saudi Journal of Medicine & Medical Sciences http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Alanazi, Ahmad A.
Atcherson, Samuel R.
Franklin, Clifford A.
Bryan, Melinda F.
Frequency Responses of Conventional and Amplified Stethoscopes for Measuring Heart Sounds
title Frequency Responses of Conventional and Amplified Stethoscopes for Measuring Heart Sounds
title_full Frequency Responses of Conventional and Amplified Stethoscopes for Measuring Heart Sounds
title_fullStr Frequency Responses of Conventional and Amplified Stethoscopes for Measuring Heart Sounds
title_full_unstemmed Frequency Responses of Conventional and Amplified Stethoscopes for Measuring Heart Sounds
title_short Frequency Responses of Conventional and Amplified Stethoscopes for Measuring Heart Sounds
title_sort frequency responses of conventional and amplified stethoscopes for measuring heart sounds
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7305673/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32587492
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/sjmms.sjmms_118_19
work_keys_str_mv AT alanaziahmada frequencyresponsesofconventionalandamplifiedstethoscopesformeasuringheartsounds
AT atchersonsamuelr frequencyresponsesofconventionalandamplifiedstethoscopesformeasuringheartsounds
AT franklinclifforda frequencyresponsesofconventionalandamplifiedstethoscopesformeasuringheartsounds
AT bryanmelindaf frequencyresponsesofconventionalandamplifiedstethoscopesformeasuringheartsounds