Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 135 posts

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

#31

Post by matheusmoreira »

boelboel wrote: post #27
colinbartlett wrote: post #2

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

People buying stethoscopes tend to be reasonably affluent. Some of the pricier ones just look better and people usually buy them when you get into med school (at least this was the case for me), it's somewhat symbolic so why not splurge.

There does seem to be a difference in quality though. It's much easier to hear the important things with my littman than with the cheap generic stethoscopes I usually find lying around in clinics.

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

#32

Post by classichasclass »

NewsaHackO wrote: post #24
elAhmo wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is somewhat of a critical tool, so you don't wanna be checked by a doctor who made their own stethoscope or got one for 3 USD on AliExpress.

It’s funny, most physicians agree that the cheap disposable stethoscopes in isolation rooms are the best, mostly because they are so loud it’s difficult miss anything with them. However, I am not a cardiologist so they may have a different opinion.

I've actually found them pretty terrible. I can't hear subtle findings at all with those. My usual stethoscope is an older-model Littman Cardiology III with stiff rubber and a dual pediatric-adult head. I've had it for over 25 years.

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

#33

Post by Lalabadie »

colinbartlett wrote: post #2

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

My daughter's toy stethoscope has actual tubing, some sort of diaphragm, and that seems to work reasonably well!

I'm not surprised good results are available for a few dollars.

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

#35

Post by DoctorOetker »

recursivegirth wrote: post #21
elAhmo wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is somewhat of a critical tool, so you don't wanna be checked by a doctor who made their own stethoscope or got one for 3 USD on AliExpress.

Our one that DIY'd one like one would do a dosing rod in their garage.

Well-formed sentence one dosed for make benefit understandability not garage DIY'd one?

Written on ether?

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

#37

Post by Lalabadie »

sonofhans wrote: post #25
colinbartlett wrote: post #2

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

Years ago I had my blood pressure taken by a nurse; this was when they did it manually, squeezing the pressure cuff bulb by hand and listening with a stethoscope. The doctor came in later, saw the numbers and frowned, and took my pressure again. She (both were women) ended up with a reading much more within my normal range. I asked, joking, “So are you just better than her?” “No,” my doctor replied, “She’s better. Sh…

The pressure cuff + stethoscope combo is called a sphygmomanometer. It's a pretty fascinating piece of technology: A heartbeat is only audible in the earpiece when the cuff is compressing between someone's systolic and diastolic pressure.

To use it, you get the cuff pressure high enough that you stop hearing a heartbeat in the earpiece. Start releasing pressure slowly. As it comes down, take note of where on the dial you start hearing the heartbeat. That's systolic pressure. Keep listening, and take note of where you stop hearing the heartbeat. That's diastolic pressure.

Using one feels kind of magic.

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

#38

Post by bluGill »

bsza wrote: post #29
xyzzy_plugh wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is a good point, insofar that how bacterial resistant the stethoscope is relevant. Stethoscopes made of stainless steel are going to beat anything 3d printed by a significant margin.

It definitely doesn’t help that prints from filament printers are very porous, 100% infill or not. Maybe sealing it with epoxy after printing would help?

This seems like another case where the hobby has discovered the 3d printer hammer and forgot that cnc tools (lathe, milling machines) are often better and faster for the job. Or if plastic is what you want injection molding is something you can do on a hobby scale and it is much better (but unlike the others this isn't something you can go from CAD to widget)

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

#39

Post by dieselgate »

stronglikedan wrote: post #19

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.

Respectfully, as this is HN, I do not believe that is the purpose of the posted Github repository.

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

#40

Post by NewsaHackO »

classichasclass wrote: post #32
NewsaHackO wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s funny, most physicians agree that the cheap disposable stethoscopes in isolation rooms are the best, mostly because they are so loud it’s difficult miss anything with them. However, I am not a cardiologist so they may have a different opinion.

I've actually found them pretty terrible. I can't hear subtle findings at all with those. My usual stethoscope is an older-model Littman Cardiology III with stiff rubber and a dual pediatric-adult head. I've had it for over 25 years.

I guess it's different strokes, because I can definitely hear subtle sounds much easier with them. In fact normal sounds sound like it is going to blow out my ears. The only issue I have is consistency; it's difficult to gauge how much something has changed over time with different stethoscopes, especially pulmonary edema and wheezing.
Post reply on HN