Computerized lung sound analysis as diagnostic aid for the detection of abnormal lung sounds: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Arati Gurung, Carolyn G. Scrafford, James M. Tielsch, Orin S. Levine, William Checkley

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Rationale: The standardized use of a stethoscope for chest auscultation in clinical research is limited by its inherent inter-listener variability. Electronic auscultation and automated classification of recorded lung sounds may help prevent some of these shortcomings. Objective: We sought to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies implementing computerized lung sound analysis (CLSA) to aid in the detection of abnormal lung sounds for specific respiratory disorders. Methods: We searched for articles on CLSA in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and ISI Web of Knowledge through July 31, 2010. Following qualitative review, we conducted a meta-analysis to estimate the sensitivity and specificity of CLSA for the detection of abnormal lung sounds. Measurements and main results: Of 208 articles identified, we selected eight studies for review. Most studies employed either electret microphones or piezoelectric sensors for auscultation, and Fourier Transform and Neural Network algorithms for analysis and automated classification of lung sounds. Overall sensitivity for the detection of wheezes or crackles using CLSA was 80% (95% CI 72-86%) and specificity was 85% (95% CI 78-91%). Conclusions: While quality data on CLSA are relatively limited, analysis of existing information suggests that CLSA can provide a relatively high specificity for detecting abnormal lung sounds such as crackles and wheezes. Further research and product development could promote the value of CLSA in research studies or its diagnostic utility in clinical settings.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1396-1403
Number of pages8
JournalRespiratory Medicine
Volume105
Issue number9
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 2011

Fingerprint

Respiratory Sounds
Meta-Analysis
Auscultation
Research
Stethoscopes
Fourier Analysis
MEDLINE
Libraries
Thorax

Keywords

  • Electronic auscultation
  • Lung sound analysis
  • Pneumonia
  • Respiratory disorders

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine

Cite this

Computerized lung sound analysis as diagnostic aid for the detection of abnormal lung sounds : A systematic review and meta-analysis. / Gurung, Arati; Scrafford, Carolyn G.; Tielsch, James M.; Levine, Orin S.; Checkley, William.

In: Respiratory Medicine, Vol. 105, No. 9, 09.2011, p. 1396-1403.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Gurung, Arati ; Scrafford, Carolyn G. ; Tielsch, James M. ; Levine, Orin S. ; Checkley, William. / Computerized lung sound analysis as diagnostic aid for the detection of abnormal lung sounds : A systematic review and meta-analysis. In: Respiratory Medicine. 2011 ; Vol. 105, No. 9. pp. 1396-1403.
@article{e3c3e4b10ed54557b5ac46ed86bfa118,
title = "Computerized lung sound analysis as diagnostic aid for the detection of abnormal lung sounds: A systematic review and meta-analysis",
abstract = "Rationale: The standardized use of a stethoscope for chest auscultation in clinical research is limited by its inherent inter-listener variability. Electronic auscultation and automated classification of recorded lung sounds may help prevent some of these shortcomings. Objective: We sought to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies implementing computerized lung sound analysis (CLSA) to aid in the detection of abnormal lung sounds for specific respiratory disorders. Methods: We searched for articles on CLSA in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and ISI Web of Knowledge through July 31, 2010. Following qualitative review, we conducted a meta-analysis to estimate the sensitivity and specificity of CLSA for the detection of abnormal lung sounds. Measurements and main results: Of 208 articles identified, we selected eight studies for review. Most studies employed either electret microphones or piezoelectric sensors for auscultation, and Fourier Transform and Neural Network algorithms for analysis and automated classification of lung sounds. Overall sensitivity for the detection of wheezes or crackles using CLSA was 80{\%} (95{\%} CI 72-86{\%}) and specificity was 85{\%} (95{\%} CI 78-91{\%}). Conclusions: While quality data on CLSA are relatively limited, analysis of existing information suggests that CLSA can provide a relatively high specificity for detecting abnormal lung sounds such as crackles and wheezes. Further research and product development could promote the value of CLSA in research studies or its diagnostic utility in clinical settings.",
keywords = "Electronic auscultation, Lung sound analysis, Pneumonia, Respiratory disorders",
author = "Arati Gurung and Scrafford, {Carolyn G.} and Tielsch, {James M.} and Levine, {Orin S.} and William Checkley",
year = "2011",
month = "9",
doi = "10.1016/j.rmed.2011.05.007",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "105",
pages = "1396--1403",
journal = "Respiratory Medicine",
issn = "0954-6111",
publisher = "W.B. Saunders Ltd",
number = "9",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Computerized lung sound analysis as diagnostic aid for the detection of abnormal lung sounds

T2 - A systematic review and meta-analysis

AU - Gurung, Arati

AU - Scrafford, Carolyn G.

AU - Tielsch, James M.

AU - Levine, Orin S.

AU - Checkley, William

PY - 2011/9

Y1 - 2011/9

N2 - Rationale: The standardized use of a stethoscope for chest auscultation in clinical research is limited by its inherent inter-listener variability. Electronic auscultation and automated classification of recorded lung sounds may help prevent some of these shortcomings. Objective: We sought to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies implementing computerized lung sound analysis (CLSA) to aid in the detection of abnormal lung sounds for specific respiratory disorders. Methods: We searched for articles on CLSA in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and ISI Web of Knowledge through July 31, 2010. Following qualitative review, we conducted a meta-analysis to estimate the sensitivity and specificity of CLSA for the detection of abnormal lung sounds. Measurements and main results: Of 208 articles identified, we selected eight studies for review. Most studies employed either electret microphones or piezoelectric sensors for auscultation, and Fourier Transform and Neural Network algorithms for analysis and automated classification of lung sounds. Overall sensitivity for the detection of wheezes or crackles using CLSA was 80% (95% CI 72-86%) and specificity was 85% (95% CI 78-91%). Conclusions: While quality data on CLSA are relatively limited, analysis of existing information suggests that CLSA can provide a relatively high specificity for detecting abnormal lung sounds such as crackles and wheezes. Further research and product development could promote the value of CLSA in research studies or its diagnostic utility in clinical settings.

AB - Rationale: The standardized use of a stethoscope for chest auscultation in clinical research is limited by its inherent inter-listener variability. Electronic auscultation and automated classification of recorded lung sounds may help prevent some of these shortcomings. Objective: We sought to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies implementing computerized lung sound analysis (CLSA) to aid in the detection of abnormal lung sounds for specific respiratory disorders. Methods: We searched for articles on CLSA in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and ISI Web of Knowledge through July 31, 2010. Following qualitative review, we conducted a meta-analysis to estimate the sensitivity and specificity of CLSA for the detection of abnormal lung sounds. Measurements and main results: Of 208 articles identified, we selected eight studies for review. Most studies employed either electret microphones or piezoelectric sensors for auscultation, and Fourier Transform and Neural Network algorithms for analysis and automated classification of lung sounds. Overall sensitivity for the detection of wheezes or crackles using CLSA was 80% (95% CI 72-86%) and specificity was 85% (95% CI 78-91%). Conclusions: While quality data on CLSA are relatively limited, analysis of existing information suggests that CLSA can provide a relatively high specificity for detecting abnormal lung sounds such as crackles and wheezes. Further research and product development could promote the value of CLSA in research studies or its diagnostic utility in clinical settings.

KW - Electronic auscultation

KW - Lung sound analysis

KW - Pneumonia

KW - Respiratory disorders

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79960454876&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79960454876&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.rmed.2011.05.007

DO - 10.1016/j.rmed.2011.05.007

M3 - Article

C2 - 21676606

AN - SCOPUS:79960454876

VL - 105

SP - 1396

EP - 1403

JO - Respiratory Medicine

JF - Respiratory Medicine

SN - 0954-6111

IS - 9

ER -