• Kasper Iversen, Ane Søgaard Teisner, Morten Dalsgaard, Rasmus Greibe, Hans Bording Timm, Lene Theil Skovgaard, Asbjørn Hróbjartsson, O Copenhagen, S Copenhagen, and K Copenhagen.
• Clinic of Cardiology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark. kasper.iversen@dadlnet.dk
• Am. Heart J. 2006 Jul 1;152(1):85.e1-7.

BackgroundAuscultation of the heart is a routine procedure. It is not known whether auscultatory skills can be improved by teaching or with the use of an advanced stethoscope.MethodsThis study was a randomized trial with a 2 x 2 factorial design. Seventy-two house officers were randomized to a simple or an advanced stethoscope and to a 4-hour course in auscultation or no course. The doctors auscultated 20 patients' hearts and categorized findings as normal or as one or more of 5 categories of heart diseases. Patients were selected such that 16 had a known heart disease as well as a corresponding murmur and 4 had no heart disease or murmur. Auscultatory performance was assessed as concordance with echocardiographic findings and interobserver variation.ResultsDoctors using the advanced stethoscope diagnosed 35% of the patients correctly, as compared with doctors using the simple stethoscope who did 33% of the patients (P = .27). Similarly, 34% of the patients were diagnosed correctly by doctors who had received teaching as compared with 33% of those who were by doctors who had received no teaching (P = .41). The kappa values were higher for doctors who had received teaching for aortic stenosis (0.43 vs 0.28, P = .004) and ventricular septum defect (0.07 vs 0.01, P = .003). There was no difference between groups for any other single murmur or for the detection of murmurs as such.ConclusionHeart auscultation findings were in poor accordance with echocardiographic findings and had high interobserver variation. Neither outcome improved to any important extent with the subjects' use of an advanced stethoscope or attending of a course in heart auscultation.

19 keywords...

hide…