Abstract
ImportanceThe number of innovations in health care based on the use of platforms, digital devices, apps, and artificial intelligence has grown exponentially in recent years. When used correctly, these technologies allow inequities in access to health care to be addressed by optimizing care and reducing social and geographic barriers. However, most of the technological health care solutions proposed have not undergone rigorous clinical studies.ObjectiveTo assess the concordance between measurements from a remote physical examination using a mobile medical device and measurements from a conventional in-person physical examination.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis nonrandomized controlled trial was conducted from January 1 to December 31, 2020. The clinical parameters compared were heart rate; body temperature; heart, lung, and abdominal auscultation; otoscopy; throat and oral examination; and skin examination. A total of 690 patients with clinical stability and various symptoms who were seen in the emergency department of 2 Brazilian pediatric hospitals were eligible to enter this study.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcome was concordance between measurements from a telemedicine physical examination using a mobile medical device and measurements from a conventional in-person physical examination. The secondary outcome was the specificity and sensitivity of the digital device, considering the conventional in-person consultation as the gold standard.ResultsAmong 690 patients, the median (IQR) age at study entry was 5 (1-9) years; 348 (50.4%) were female, and 331 (48.0%) presented with a chronic disease. Regarding the primary outcome, the concordance values were 90% or greater for skin examination (94% for rash, 100% for hemorrhagic suffusion, and 95% for signs of secondary infection), characteristics of the mucosa (98% for hydration and 97% for coloring), and heart (95% for murmur, 97% for rhythms, and 98% for sounds), lung (91% for adventitious sounds, 97% for vesicular sounds, and 90% for fever), and abdominal (92% for abdominal sounds) auscultations. Concordance values were lower for otoscopy (72% for the ear canal and 86% for the tympanic membrane), throat and oral examination (72%), and rhinoscopy (79% for mucosa and 81% for secretion). The specificity was greater than 70% (ranging from 74.5% for the ear canal to 99.7% for hemorrhagic suffusion) for all variables. The sensitivity was greater than 52% for skin examination (58.0% for rash and 54.8% for signs of secondary infection), throat and oral examination (52.7%), and otoscopy (66.1% for the ear canal and 64.4% for the tympanic membrane).Conclusions and RelevanceIn this study, measurements from remote physical examination with a mobile medical device had satisfactory concordance with measurements from in-person physical examination for otoscopy, throat and oral examination, skin examination, and heart and lung auscultation, with limitations regarding heart and lung auscultation in infants and abdominal auscultation in children of all ages. Measurements from remote physical examination via a mobile medical device were comparable with those from in-person physical examination in children older than 2 years. These findings suggest that telemedicine may be an alternative to in-person examination in certain contexts and may help to optimize access to health care services and reduce social and geographic barriers.Trial RegistrationBrazilian Registry of Clinical Trials Identifier: RBR-346ymn
Topics

No keywords indexed for this article. Browse by subject →

References
31
[1]
Biagio "Video-otoscopy recordings for diagnosis of childhood ear disease using telehealth at primary health care level." J Telemed Telecare (2014) 10.1177/1357633x14541038
[2]
Iversen "A randomized trial comparing electronic and conventional stethoscopes." Am J Med (2005) 10.1016/j.amjmed.2005.06.016
[3]
Mandavia (2018) 10.1111/coa.2018.43.issue-1
[4]
McConnochie "Potential of telemedicine in pediatric primary care." Pediatr Rev (2006) 10.1542/pir.27.9.e58
[5]
McDaniel (2019) 10.1089/tmj.2018.0214
[6]
Richards "Comparison of traditional otoscope to iPhone otoscope in the pediatric ED." Am J Emerg Med (2015) 10.1016/j.ajem.2015.04.063
[7]
Silverman "Digital stethoscope—improved auscultation at the bedside." Am J Cardiol (2019) 10.1016/j.amjcard.2018.12.022
[8]
Haimi "Physicians’ experiences, attitudes and challenges in a pediatric telemedicine service." Pediatr Res (2018) 10.1038/s41390-018-0117-6
[9]
Notario (2019) 10.1089/tmj.2018.0186
[10]
Improving the Reporting Quality of Nonrandomized Evaluations of Behavioral and Public Health Interventions: The TREND Statement

Don C. Des Jarlais, Cynthia Lyles, Nicole Crepaz

American Journal of Public Health 10.2105/ajph.94.3.361
[11]
[12]
[13]
Ranganathan "Common pitfalls in statistical analysis: measures of agreement." Perspect Clin Res (2017) 10.4103/picr.picr_123_17
[14]
The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data

J. Richard Landis, Gary G. Koch

Biometrics 1977 10.2307/2529310
[15]
Demant "Smartphone otoscopy by non-specialist health workers in rural Greenland: a cross-sectional study." Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol (2019) 10.1016/j.ijporl.2019.109628
[16]
Rappaport "Assessment of a smartphone otoscope device for the diagnosis and management of otitis media." Clin Pediatr (Phila) (2016) 10.1177/0009922815593909
[17]
Shah "iPhone otoscopes: currently available, but reliable for tele-otoscopy in the hands of parents?" Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol (2018) 10.1016/j.ijporl.2018.01.003
[18]
Zenk "Accuracy of detecting irregular cardiac rhythms via telemedicine." J Telemed Telecare (2004) 10.1258/135763304322764211
[19]
Kleinman "Evaluation of digital otoscopy in pediatric patients: a prospective randomized controlled clinical trial." Am J Emerg Med (2021) 10.1016/j.ajem.2021.04.030
[20]
Innocent Heart Murmur

Arpan R Doshi

Cureus 2018 10.7759/cureus.3689
[21]
Punnoose "Innocent (harmless) heart murmurs in children." JAMA (2012) 10.1001/jama.2012.6223
[22]
Smith "The innocent heart murmur in children." J Pediatr Health Care (1997) 10.1016/s0891-5245(97)90103-6
[23]
Dumas "Feasibility of an electronic stethoscope system for monitoring neonatal bowel sounds." Conn Med (2013)
[24]
Baid "A critical review of auscultating bowel sounds." Br J Nurs (2009) 10.12968/bjon.2009.18.18.44555
[25]
[26]
[27]
Connected devices to support remote examination and diagnosis in primary care and specialty care. Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health. Updated October 28, 2022. Accessed April 2022. https://www.cadth.ca/connected-devices-support-remote-examination-and-diagnosis-primary-care-and-specialty-care
[28]
TytoPro General Operation User Guide. Software version 5.2. TytoCare Ltd. August 2021. Accessed March 2022. https://static-cloud.tytocare.com/5_2/manuals/en-us/760-00058_D03_TytoPro-General_Operation_FDA_G2_EN.pdf
[29]
World Health Organization. Ethics and Governance of Artificial Intelligence for Health. World Health Organization; 2021. Accessed March 2022. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240029200
[30]
Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, Pub L No. 104-191, 110 Stat 1936 (1996). Accessed December 13, 2022. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-104publ191/pdf/PLAW-104publ191.pdf
[31]
ALSG Centre for Training & Development. Manchester Triage System. Advanced Life Support Group. 2017. Updated February 24, 2021. Accessed December 13, 2022. https://www.triagenet.net/classroom/mod/page/view.php?id=1884