Remote Auscultation of Heart and Lungs as an Acceptable Alternative to Legacy Measures in Quarantined COVID-19 Patients—Prospective Evaluation of 250 Examinations

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the assimilation of telemedicine platforms into medical practice. Nevertheless, research-based evidence in this field is still accumulating. This was a prospective, cross-sectional comparative assessment of a remote physical examination device used mainly for heart and lung digital auscultation. We analyzed usage patterns, user (physician) subjective appreciation and compared it to legacy measures. Eighteen physicians (median age 36 years (IQR 32–45): two interns, seven residents and nine senior physicians; eleven internists, five geriatricians and two pediatricians) executed over 250 remote physical examinations. Their median work duration with quarantined patients was 60 days (IQR 45–60). The median number of patients examined by a single physician was 17 (IQR 10–34). Regarding overall estimation, all participants tended to prefer the remote examination in the setting of quarantined patients (median 6, IQR 3.75–8), while no statistically significant difference was demonstrated compared to the indifference value (p = 0.122). Internists preferred tele-medical examination over non-internists, with significant differences between groups regarding heart auscultation, (median 7, (IQR 3–7) vs. median 2, (IQR 1–5, respectively)), p = 0.044. In the setting of quarantined patients, from the physicians’ perspective, a digital platform for remote auscultation of heart and lungs was considered as an acceptable alternative to legacy measures.