Live data from Hacker News

An open-source stethoscope that costs between $2.5 and $5 to produce

github.com

101–110 of 135 posts

Re: An open-source stethoscope that costs between $2.5 and $5 to produce

#101

The thing is that I can get just as good if not better ones (metal) for $7 all day long, and not have to spend time sourcing and assembling materials, and I don't even have to leave my house to do it.

When my kids were little they had a toy doctors set and the fake wooden stethoscope broke; replacing it with a real one was significantly cheaper than paying Melissa and Doug for a new one.

Hat tip. I never heard of "Melissa and Doug" before this post. I found the doctor's kit here on Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/Melissa-Doug-Doctors-Original-Pieces/...

It is adorable!

Re: An open-source stethoscope that costs between $2.5 and $5 to produce

#102
post #26

The thing is that I can get just as good if not better ones (metal) for $7 all day long, and not have to spend time sourcing and assembling materials, and I don't even have to leave my house to do it.

I'm not sure what you are buying, but it wouldn't surprise me if they were done in a factory that does medical grade quality control. While the odds are a medical problem from a non-medical grade stethoscope seem low, it still seems a couple bucks is worth the price. (if we are talking thousands I'd ask for a deeper drive into what that really gets you)

How much do you think doctor's spend on their stethoscope when they live in a developing country? My guess: About 10 USD. Think about the global demand for stethoscopes for countries where GDP per capita is below 4000 USD. It must be enormous.

Re: An open-source stethoscope that costs between $2.5 and $5 to produce

#103

I was shocked to see that a "brand name" stethoscope is $100+ and even generic ones are $30.

There are cheap, generic scopes (Sprague-Rappaport types) that are very sensitive but the double tube also causes a lot of noise. There are knock-offs of the Littmann scopes in the market. Then there are the scopes doctors usually buy, which are Littmann, Harvey (made by Welch-Allyn) and Heine, and a few smaller makers. No marketer of a high-quality scope wants to sell it at a $30 or less price point, and if you're g…

    > It doesn't feel cold to the patient
This part stood out to me. Do they use a special material? This sounds interesting.

Re: An open-source stethoscope that costs between $2.5 and $5 to produce

#104
Interesting project.

Feels like the real value here is not beating commercial stethoscopes, but accessibility and local manufacturing. even if performance is slightly worse, being able to produce something “good enough at scale in low-resource environments could still have huge impact.

Curious though has anyone tested consistency across multiple prints? I’d expect variation in material + print quality to affect acoustic performance quite a bit.

Re: An open-source stethoscope that costs between $2.5 and $5 to produce

#105
post #67

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/264691582901 (if eBay kills that link, then for future HNers it's a link to an inexpensive bright yellow single-use plastic stethoscope by a company called Valuemed, which have been available basically forever and are for when you cannot risk getting something nasty on your good Littman) £1.99 in single unit quantities from a dude on eBay. These things are so cheap in bulk that they'd ship…

Right. There are plenty of cheap plastic stethoscopes on Alibaba. There are even metal ones in the $2 range. If you want to bang out simple parts in quantity, 3D printing is not the way to go.

Up next: 3D metal printed version!

Re: An open-source stethoscope that costs between $2.5 and $5 to produce

#106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a bit of a head scratcher. It would require abject incompetence on the part of jellybean stephoscope manufactorers for this to make sense. On the other hand the reason Litmann stephoscopes are expensive is target market (doctors), build quality and amortization of cost over probably a decade of use. Stephoscopes are a metanym for doctor, and doctors don't want cheap stephoscopes. It reminds me of the product to…

steThoscope I normally wouldn't comment just to correct a misspelling, but it's pretty consistent and it's an entirely different sound, as well as being what the thread is about.

Thanks!

Re: An open-source stethoscope that costs between $2.5 and $5 to produce

#107
post #97
post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, if you're going to be using it for the next 10 years, it is worth going for the more expensive Littman if you can. However, I've heard that there are decent Chinese clones, and honestly I've used those $1 stethoscopes in isolation units and they're not terrible for basic pulmonary auscultation.

But where do they fail? What does a good stethoscope bring? better and clearer amplification?

They are a nicer product to use, by people who are relatively well off and will use them repeatedly throughout the day for a decade. $50 (basic stethoscope) vs $200 (premium stethoscope) is simply not that expensive for a doctor or a family buying a graduation gift, even in poorer countries, given the lifetime of the device (easily 10 years of daily use).

Within that space you get things like soft-seal eartips , where as most cheaper models came with hard rubber, a stiffer spring that holds its shape better, and great acoustics (though most users will know what to listen for by the time they pick one up). You also get less tube noise from movement, less rubbing and scratching under the head, and longer listening time without having to fiddle.

The diaphragm on expensive stethoscopes is more complex, often "floating" — not under tension at rest, but when you press down, a ring tightens it. This gives you both bell (low frequency) and diaphragm (high frequency) response from a single side, so you modulate pressure rather than rotating the head.

Why do expensive stethoscopes fail?

1. You lose them. 2. Wear and tear many parts are replaceable, but repairing the whole head often isn't worth it. Rotating heads can become a failure point, growing lax over time, with grit accelerating the damage. 3. Neck oils degrade the PVC tubing. 4. Alcohol/cleaning wipes also degrade the PVC tubing.

Surprisingly, Littmann hasn't released a dedicated long-term care wipe for occasional use.

Re: An open-source stethoscope that costs between $2.5 and $5 to produce

#108
post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But where do they fail? What does a good stethoscope bring? better and clearer amplification?

Yeah, that comment also sent off internal alarms for me also. It would be a great blog post (or YouTube video) for someone to buy a bunch of stethoscopes and objectively test them. I would bet that there is a 10 USD model that is 98% as good as 200 USD models from 3M Littmann. And similar to the neverending arguments about "premium high-fidelity stereo equipment", I bet most doctors cannot tell the difference between…

Not wild when you consider the industry. Although those prices seem high perhaps by 20% compared to international markets.

IIRC in 2010 a Litmann Classic II was $60 today it's $100. That's what most medical students and doctors might use early in their career and it's probably nearly all the benefits of the premium lines.

But even ~$200 for their top tier lines are not expensive given their the tool of the industry.

That's a single year of JetBrains subscription? Or a single month of Claude? For something they could use for 10+ years.

The ~$500-700 electronic with recording stethoscopes always seemed gimmicky to me. But are legitimately useful for people with a hearing impairment.

> I would bet that there is a 10 USD model that is 98% as good as 200 USD models from 3M Littmann

I'd take this in a different direction, a common adage is that diagnosis is 80% history 15% examination, 5% investigation. In this case too the stethoscope performance is a slice of that 15%, and is dominated by the knowledge and experience of the user. If you don't know what to listen for and why (and many doctors won't compared to say a experienced cardiologist) they won't be able to hear it from a perfectly recorded FLAC file.

Re: An open-source stethoscope that costs between $2.5 and $5 to produce

#109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a bit of a head scratcher. It would require abject incompetence on the part of jellybean stephoscope manufactorers for this to make sense. On the other hand the reason Litmann stephoscopes are expensive is target market (doctors), build quality and amortization of cost over probably a decade of use. Stephoscopes are a metanym for doctor, and doctors don't want cheap stephoscopes. It reminds me of the product to…

steThoscope I normally wouldn't comment just to correct a misspelling, but it's pretty consistent and it's an entirely different sound, as well as being what the thread is about.

To some percentage of the British population, I fink you'll find it's exactly the same sound.

Re: An open-source stethoscope that costs between $2.5 and $5 to produce

#110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, that comment also sent off internal alarms for me also. It would be a great blog post (or YouTube video) for someone to buy a bunch of stethoscopes and objectively test them. I would bet that there is a 10 USD model that is 98% as good as 200 USD models from 3M Littmann. And similar to the neverending arguments about "premium high-fidelity stereo equipment", I bet most doctors cannot tell the difference between…

Not wild when you consider the industry. Although those prices seem high perhaps by 20% compared to international markets. IIRC in 2010 a Litmann Classic II was $60 today it's $100. That's what most medical students and doctors might use early in their career and it's probably nearly all the benefits of the premium lines. But even ~$200 for their top tier lines are not expensive given their the tool of the industry.…

At the higher end it's also just smaller more specialist (cardiologiste, pædiatricians) markets that can command a higher price as a result.
Post reply on HN