Slashdot Mirror
Cheap, 3D-Printed Stethoscope Challenges Top-of-the-Line Model
mask.of.sanity writes: Tarek Loubani, an emergency physician working in the Gaza strip, has 3D-printed a 30-cent stethoscope that beats the world's best $200 equivalent as part of a project to bottom-out the cost of medical devices. Loubani together with a team of medical and technology specialists designed the stethoscope and tested it against global standard benchmarks, finding it out performed the gold-standard Littmann Cardiology 3. They now intend to make a range of ultra-low cost medical devices for the developing world.
It cost about US$10,000 to develop, and has been released as an open source model for anyone to use. Loubani says the project is following the footsteps of the free software movement and aims to replace expensive proprietary solutions. He hopes that within 25 years the devices will be common-place in the Third World, and be the "Apache of the medical world."
It cost about US$10,000 to develop, and has been released as an open source model for anyone to use. Loubani says the project is following the footsteps of the free software movement and aims to replace expensive proprietary solutions. He hopes that within 25 years the devices will be common-place in the Third World, and be the "Apache of the medical world."
In America, higher profits.
In developing nations, better medical care.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Reminds me of my electronic tyre pressure gauge. It was extremely good - as a random number generator. Moved back to analog.
If it costs 30 to make with a 3D printer and it has a shape that can be injection-molded then it means it will only cost a few cents. Put them inside cigarette packs as a surprise, like Cracker Jack.
Better than the doctor not having a stethoscope, moron.
Honestly, use your brain.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
I suspect that $0.30 cost is just the materials used in making it. Add in design costs, buying the machine, hiring people to watch over the machines, HR, accounting, sales, and support, that stethoscope can easily cost a full $3.00.
Stethoscopes don't need to be 'tested' much. You hear stuff or not. They're not FDA approved.
We've have cheap stethoscopes that work pretty well for ages. The big deal with the Littman Cardiology scopes is that they are built like tanks and you can get replacement bits for them. MRIs use plastic stethoscopes in the MRI suite because metal ones have this annoying tendency to get rocketed into the 1 Tesla magnet at inopportune times. They cost a couple of bucks.
I'm glad they've solved their problem with a 3D printer. They could have just as well solved it with knowing a good Chinese supplier.
And pulse oximeters / EKGs - good luck with that. First off you can buy a good pulse ox for about $15, retail. I'll bet you can get them for half price in bulk. And you can buy a used, serviceable EKG for $50-100 - the big costs being the thermal paper they use.
Geez, next big thing will be a 3D printed gizmo connected to the Internet....
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
But, honestly, you can solve the problem of distribution far more cheaply than you can solve the problem of purchasing expensive things and then solving the problem of distribution. Because you'd never be able to afford to buy as many as you can print.
Yes, it will cost more to ship 1000 stethoscopes than it would to ship 3 ... but if you can print 1000 stethoscopes for less than buying those 3 ... I'm sure the agencies involved in this would love to have that problem.
I'm no doctor, but if NGOs, aid agencies, Doctors without Borders, or poor countries suddenly had 1000 (or 10,000) stethoscopes they had to figure out how to distribute ... they would be overjoyed.
Freakin' stethoscopes for everyone. I'm not seeing much of a downside here.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
In the US? No, because the costs of healthcare here aren't driven by the costs of stethoscopes. They cost a couple hundred dollars and last for a very long time; high healthcare costs are much more likely to come from "Oh, my exam showed a possible irregularity; to be safe, we should send you in for an echocardiogram (or cardiac MRI if the system has one)." And in the vast majority of cases, you get an expensive procedure to learn things are basically OK.
It's really easy to prescribe that, because hey, we have the machine and it seems a lot better to run a test when it's not needed than skip one that could have caught something serious. And since insurance covers most of it, it's not that expensive for an individual patient...
What this could help with is availability of basic healthcare where a $200 stethoscope is a really big deal -- especially if you're in an environment where equipment is likely to get damaged or stolen.
You need the stethoscope to detect the return of blood flow in the artery - the sphygmanometer is used to apply measurable pressure to your arm to occlude the flow of blood, you use the stethoscope to listen for the turbulent flow.
And they don't need calibrating, because the numbers in blood pressure measurements are "millimetres of mercury" - and that's literally what these instruments use (they're a glass tube with a suspended mercury column attached to the arm cuff).
They're much more accurate, reliable, and fast than using the robot version which repeatedly inflates and deflates the cuff and has a sensor attached to the bladder which detects your pulse. As a bonus they're also much less uncomfortable and distressing to the patient (because you can do the reading much more quickly and not cut off the flow of blood in their arm for a minute or so...) and thus give less false positives of high pressure because of stress....
Littmann is mostly about brand recognition and status ; nurses buy £3.50 cheap mass produced stethoscopes, doctors buy £50 Littmanns.
The Littmann units are arguably superior in quality. On the other hand, I had a £10 stethoscope (it costs a bit more now) built like a piece of Russian miltary surplus that all my professional colleagues wanted to borrow because they thought it sounded clearer and louder than their expensive Littmanns.
It also lasted longer - the plastic Littmann use for their tubes is prone to fatigue and cracking. The rubber tubes on this thing lasted for years.
There's nothing in the Littmann that's inherently expensive or difficult to manufacture, it's just brand recognition, patents, and the fact that it's a niche product with a limited market.
Actually, a stethoscope is used with a normal sphygmomanometer to check blood pressure.
You are technically correct, which as we all know is the best kind of correct.
I feel sorry for people that don't drink, because when they get up in the morning, that's as good as they're gonna feel
You seem to know the words but not the process. Lemme share...
You wrap the cuff around their bicep. You turn the knob and then turn it again so that you have finally locked the value. Nope, turn it again.
You pump the bulb up enough to make the wearer wince in pain - that should be good.
Cram the scope under the cuff above the joint.
You release the air with the knob too quickly so you put it back in - again, wincing is required.
Cram the scope back in.
Let the air out more slowly.
Listen and watch the gauge.
When you hear thump thump thump - note the number on the gauge.
Let more air out. Slowly...
When the thump thump thump noises stop note the number on the gauge.
Smile and nod at the patient but do not tell them anything.
I learned this when I was a young Marine. I am pretty sure it is standard practice.
Anyhow, the scope is kind of required. It lets you hear the thump thump thump noise. They probably do not have expensive equipment in the middle of a war zone. Well, no. They probably do not have expensive medical equipment. I can just see them pushing around the little cart with the attached cuff and thermometer to reach injured soldiers. Those little wheels will do well on uneven surfaces and standing up will certainly not make them a target. They can just put a red cross on it and nobody will think that makes an excellent target.
Later, I will tell you how to do injections.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
3d printing in plastic _will_ always produce worse parts than injection molding. If you don't understand this, you aren't qualified to speak.
Probably won't ever be better. But I've learned never to say never. No one would ever need more than 640K of Ram, and we've already discovered everything.
BUT!. Whoosh for maximum whooshes. You chose a throwaway comment to get wrapped around the axle with.
My point(s) as clear as I can make them :
1.The incredibly cheap prices of injection molding are related to how many of them you make. Economy of scale.
2.The setup cost is not inexpensive.
3. While a 3-D printer does not have the economies of scale of the injection molding, it does not have the setup cost.
4. The 3-D printer will be in the hands of the person needing to make the parts, and either making parts to a plan already designed, or can even design new custom one off things as needed.
And think beyond a stethoscope. There are a lot of different parts, many of them one-off, that are needed in the medical profession.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.