Download PDFPDF
Get rid of your stethoscope!
Compose Response

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g.
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests


  • A rapid response is a moderated but not peer reviewed online response to a published article in a BMJ journal; it will not receive a DOI and will not be indexed unless it is also republished as a Letter, Correspondence or as other content. Find out more about rapid responses.
  • We intend to post all responses which are approved by the Editor, within 14 days (BMJ Journals) or 24 hours (The BMJ), however timeframes cannot be guaranteed. Responses must comply with our requirements and should contribute substantially to the topic, but it is at our absolute discretion whether we publish a response, and we reserve the right to edit or remove responses before and after publication and also republish some or all in other BMJ publications, including third party local editions in other countries and languages
  • Our requirements are stated in our rapid response terms and conditions and must be read. These include ensuring that: i) you do not include any illustrative content including tables and graphs, ii) you do not include any information that includes specifics about any patients,iii) you do not include any original data, unless it has already been published in a peer reviewed journal and you have included a reference, iv) your response is lawful, not defamatory, original and accurate, v) you declare any competing interests, vi) you understand that your name and other personal details set out in our rapid response terms and conditions will be published with any responses we publish and vii) you understand that once a response is published, we may continue to publish your response and/or edit or remove it in the future.
  • By submitting this rapid response you are agreeing to our terms and conditions for rapid responses and understand that your personal data will be processed in accordance with those terms and our privacy notice.
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on:
    Should neurologists throw away their stethoscopes?

    As a long term and avid reader of Practical Neurology I was somewhat surprised by the article and correspondence suggesting that the stethoscope is now an irrelevancy to clinical neurologists (Practical Neurology 2010;10:344) On the contrary, I believe neurologists should still use their stethoscopes. Heres why.

    Most neck bruits indicate underlying arterial disease. For instance, in a study comparing the 'blind...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:
    sometimes a stethoscope may be more of a hinderance than a help

    The irony of the provocative invocation "Get rid of your stethoscope"(1) is that, for evaluation of systolic blood pressure(SBP) in the context of hypertension-related neurological disorders such as stroke(hypertension being the underlying cause of 54% of strokes worldwide)(2), and reversible cerebral vasoconstrictor syndrome(3), palpatory measurement of sytolic blood pressure may be a good substitute for auscultation, a...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:
    I like my stethoscope!
    • Nitin K. Sethi, Assistant Professor of Neurology
    • Other Contributors:
      • Prahlad K. Sethi, Josh Torgovnick, Edward Arsura

    We read with interest Dr. Hawkes point of view titled "get rid of your stethoscope"1. In his indomitable style of writing (which we have grown to appreciate!) he makes a rather outlandish plea to neurologists around the world to sell their stethoscopes and move on to new more fancy gizmos. I trust Dr. Hawkes takes this polarized viewpoint with the intention to spur debate among the readers. Old technology is not synonymous...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.