NexTemp thermometer can be used interchangeably with tympanic or mercury thermometers for emergency department use

Objectives To determine the agreement between the chemical dot NexTemp thermometer with mercury and tympanic thermometers and the repeatability of measurements using these devices. Methods A prospective study involving a convenience sample of 194 consenting adult patients presenting to the ED, Freemasons Hospital, East Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. A survey of emergency medical staff was conducted to determine what they considered an acceptable level of agreement and repeatability for a putative new thermometer. The NexTemp thermometer’s performance was judged against this. For each thermometer, a set of two temperature measurements was made in every patient. The sequence of the set of readings (and hence device) was random between patients and the staff member performing one set was blinded to the results of the other two sets of readings in each patient. The method of Bland and Altman was used for assessing agreement and repeatability. Results Clinicians considered that a new thermometer should exhibit repeatability of ±0.3°C and agree with existing devices within ±0.5°C. The tympanic thermometer had 95% limits of repeatability of ?0.8–0.5°C compared with the NexTemp (?0.3–0.4°C) and mercury thermometers (?0.3–0.4°C). The NexTemp thermometer agreed with mercury thermometer within ?0.6–0.5°C. The tympanic thermometer agreed with the mercury thermometer within ?1.0–1.1°C. Conclusion Based on temperature measurement only, the NexTemp thermometer can be used interchangeably with current mercury and tympanic thermometers.     

Comparison of three different thermometers in evaluating the body temperature of healthy young adult individuals

The aim of this study was to compare the measurement values obtained with a non‐contact infrared thermometer, a tympanic thermometer and a chemical dot thermometer. The research population was composed of students studying in two departments of a university in Ankara. A total of 452 students who fit the inclusion criteria of the study and volunteered to participate were included in the sample. Body temperature measurements with different thermometers were performed by the same researcher at the same room temperature. Data were analyzed in a computerized environment by SPSS 15.0 statistical program pack and Bland–Altman graph. Mean age of healthy young adults participating in the study was 19.66 ± 0.94, and 55.1% of them were female. The agreement limits for non‐contact infrared and chemical dot was between ?1.30 and 0.32°C; for non‐contact infrared and tympanic was between ?1.26 and 0.13°C; and for chemical dot and tympanic ?0.89 and 0.74°C. It was determined that, although the measurement values of the tympanic membrane and chemical dot thermometers conformed with each other, the conformity of the non‐contact infrared thermometer was weak.     

A pilot study of agreement between noninvasive thermometers and the core temperature of postoperative cardiothoracic surgical patients

ObjectiveReliable and accurate temperature assessment is fundamental for clinical monitoring; noninvasive thermometers of various designs are widely used in intensive care units, sometimes without a specific assessment of their suitability and interchangeability. This study evaluated agreement of four noninvasive thermometers with a pulmonary artery catheter temperature.MethodsThis prospective method comparison study was conducted in an Australian adult intensive care unit. One hundred postoperative adult cardiothoracic surgery patients who had a pulmonary artery catheter (Edwards Lifescience) in situ were identified. The temperature reading from the pulmonary artery catheter was compared to contemporaneous measurements returned by four different thermometers—temporal Artery (TA, Technimed), Per Axilla (Axilla, Welch Allyn), Tympanic (Tymp, Covidien), and the NexTemp® (NEXT, Medical Indicators [used per axilla]). The time required to obtain each noninvasive temperature measurement was recorded.ResultsAgreements between each noninvasive temperature and the pulmonary artery catheter standard were assessed using summary statistics and the Bland–Altman method comparison approach. A clinically acceptable maximum difference from the standard was defined as ±0.5 °C. Temperature agreement with the pulmonary artery standard (mean difference °C [95% limits of agreement °C]) was greatest for Tymp (−0.20 [−0.92 to 0.52]), intermediate for AXILLA (−0.37 [−1.3 to 0.59]) and NEXT (−0.71 [−1.7 to 0.27]), and least for TA (−0.60 [−2.0 to 0.81]). The proportion of measurements within ±0.5 °C of the standard were TYMP (81%), AXILLA (63%), TA (45%), and NEXT (30%). The time to obtain measurements varied, with the Tymp and TA estimates immediate, the AXILLA a mean of 40 s (standard deviation = 11 s), while NEXT results were at the manufacturer-recommended 3-min point.ConclusionsTympanic thermometers showed closest agreement with the pulmonary artery standard. Deviations by more than 0.5 °C from that standard were relatively common with all noninvasive devices.     

Use of non-contact infrared thermometers in rehabilitation patients: a randomized controlled study

ObjectiveIn this randomized controlled study, we aimed to determine whether non-contact infrared thermometers (NCITs) are more time-efficient and create less patient distress than mercury axillary thermometers (MATs) and infrared tympanic thermometers (ITTs).MethodsForty-five rehabilitation inpatients were randomly assigned to one of three groups (NCIT, MAT, and ITT). Time required to measure body temperature with an NCIT, MAT, and ITT was recorded. We examined associations between time required to take patients’ temperature and measuring device used. Patient distress experienced during temperature measurement using the three thermometers was recorded.ResultsA significantly longer average time was required to measure temperatures using the MAT (mean 43.17, standard deviation [SD] 8.39) than the ITT (mean 13.74, SD 1.63) and NCIT (mean 12.13, SD 1.18). The thermometer used influenced the time required to measure body temperature (t = 33.99). There were significant differences among groups (NCIT vs. ITT, NCIT vs. MAT, and ITT vs. MAT) regarding patient distress among the different thermometers. Most distress arose owing to needing help from others, sleep disruption, and boredom.ConclusionThe NCIT has clinically relevant advantages over the ITT and MAT in measuring body temperature among rehabilitation patients, including saving nurses’ time and avoiding unnecessary patient distress.Clinical trial registration number (http://www.chictr.org.cn): ChiCTR1800019756.     

体温计保护筒的设计与应用

目的探讨减少体温计在使用过程中易断损的方法。方法自行设计体温计保护筒装置并进行临床观察。结果有效地解决体温计易断损的问题,且不影响测量、读数和消毒。结论体温计保护筒可降低体温计损坏,减少汞污染及玻璃对人体的伤害;使用方便,适用于医院、家庭、儿童,值得推广应用。     

Reliability of body temperature measurements in hospitalised older patients

Aims and objectives. To compare different body temperature assessment methods in older people and to assess the role of cognitive and functional characteristics in temperature recordings. Background. Axillary gallium‐in‐glass thermometers are commonly used. Their accuracy depends on the proper placement of the device and their permanence in place for eight minutes. With adequate instruction, well‐functioning patients can measure their axillary temperature by themselves, while in cognitively and functionally impaired older people, inadequate understanding of instructions and misplacement of the thermometer might determine significant recording errors. Electronic ear and axillary temperature measurements are faster, but their accuracy has not been demonstrated convincingly with older people. Methods. Patients (n = 107; aged 65–104 years) were recruited. Barthel Index and Short Portable Mental Status Questionnaire (SPMSQ) scores were obtained for each patient. Temperature readings were obtained using: the axillary gallium‐in‐glass thermometer, with (T_nurse) and without (T_self) the nurse's assistance; the electronic axillary thermometer (T_el) and the infrared tympanic thermometer (T_tymp). The T_nurse was considered as the reference method. Results. Mean difference and standard deviation (mean ± SD) in temperature recordings between the different techniques and T_nurse differed significantly from zero for T_self (?0·40 SD 0·42) and T_tymp (+0·19 SD 0·48). No significant differences in temperature recordings emerged between T_nurse and T_el. In simple linear regression models, the difference between T_self and T_nurse significantly correlated with age, gender, SPMSQ score and Barthel Index. Multiple linear regression analysis showed an underestimation of body temperature in older patients with cognitive impairments. Conclusion. Unassisted gallium‐in‐glass axillary temperature assessment is inadequate, in older patients. The differences between T_self and T_nurse are significantly influenced by age and mental decline. T_el provides adequate accuracy. Relevance to clinical practice. In geriatric settings, the electronic axillary thermometer is a safe and accurate alternative to the more traditional gallium‐in‐glass thermometer, with the advantage of saving time (five seconds in recording vs. eight minutes).     

2种体温监测方法的比较研究

目的 比较水银体温计和红外体温计测温结果 之间的差异.方法 选取需体温监测的ICU住院患者98例,对同一研究对象同时用水银体温计测量腋窝温度和用红外体温计(根据使用说明,校正后额部或耳垂后温度相当于腋窝温度)测量额部温度和耳垂后温度,记录3个部位所测温度值.结果 对参与研究的全部98例患者总体来说,3个部位体温测量值比较差异显著,比较3个部位体温均值,差值在0.2～0.5 ℃,可以认为腋温＞耳温＞额温;对于17例水银体温计测温在38.0～38.9 ℃的患者,3个部位体温值比较无显著差异,比较3个部位体温均值,差值在0.5～1.1 ℃,从临床角度考虑,3个部位体温差别有临床意义,可以认为腋温＞耳温＞额温;对于30例水银体温计测温在37.0～37.9℃的患者3个部位体温值比较有显著差异,比较3个部位体温均值,差值在0.2～0.7 ℃,可以认为腋温＞耳温＞额温;对于51例水银体温计测温在35.0～36.9 ℃的患者,3个部位体温值比较无显著差异,比较3个部位体温均值,差值为0℃,可以认为2种方法 所测3个部位体温比较无显著差异.结论 水银体温计测量腋窝温度在正常范围(35.0～36.9 ℃)的患者,可使用红外体温计替代水银体温计测温.水银体温计测量腋窝温度37.0℃以上的患者,尚不能使用红外体温计替代水银体温计测温.     

腋下测温时间的探讨

[目的]探讨使用玻璃水银体温计为病人测量腋下体温所需的最佳时间。[方法]实验1组随机选取住院病人78例,实验2组选取同一病房的医护人员、病人陪护及家属52人,平均年龄分别为79．0岁、33．5岁。取3支符合测试要求的体温表,同时置于受试者的同侧腋下,于测试时间满5min、10min、15min时分别取出,记录测得的体温值。采用SPSS11．0统计软件包进行统计学分析。[结果]实验1组5min、10min、15min测得体温分别为36．02℃±0．54℃、36．29℃±0．42℃、36．41℃±0．41℃,10min测得的体温值〉5min测得的体温值0．27℃（P〈0．001）;15min测得的体温值分别大于5min、10min测得的体温值0．39℃、0．12℃（P〈0．001）;实验2组5min、10min、15min测得体温值分别为36．27℃±0．39℃、36．65℃±0．35℃、36．88℃±0．28℃;10min测得的体温值〉5min测得的体温值0．38℃（P〈0．001）;15min测得的体温值分别大于5min、10min测得的体温值0．61℃、0．23℃（P〈0．001）。[结论]为病人测量体温,在条件允许的情况下测量15min更接近其真实的体内温度,10min测试时间可能比较适合于临床应用,5min测试时间不能够正确反映体内温度。     

腋下测温时间的探讨

[目的]探讨使用玻璃水银体温计为病人测量腋下体温所需的最佳时间。[方法]实验1组随机选取住院病人78例,实验2组选取同一病房的医护人员、病人陪护及家属52人,平均年龄分别为79.0岁、33.5岁。取3支符合测试要求的体温表,同时置于受试者的同侧腋下,于测试时间满5 min、10 min、15 min时分别取出,记录测得的体温值。采用SPSS11.0统计软件包进行统计学分析。[结果]实验1组5 min、10 min、15 min测得体温分别为36.02℃±0.54℃、36.29℃±0.42℃、36.41℃±0.41℃,10 min测得的体温值>5 min测得的体温值0.27℃(P<0.001);15 min测得的体温值分别大于5 min、10 min测得的体温值0.39℃、0.12℃(P<0.001);实验2组5 min、10 min、15 min测得体温值分别为36.27℃±0.39℃、36.65℃±0.35℃、36.88℃±0.28℃;10 min测得的体温值>5 min测得的体温值0.38℃(P<0.001);15 min测得的体温值分别大于5 min、10 min测得的体温值0.61℃、0.23℃(P<0.001)。[结论]为病人测量体温,在条件允许的情况下测量15 min更接近其真实的体内温度,10 min测试时间可能比较适合于临床应用,5 min测试时间不能够正确反映体内温度。     

Establishing a reference range for normal canine tympanic membrane temperature measured with a veterinary aural thermometer

Studies have shown that tympanic membrane temperature (TMT) under-reports body temperature when compared to rectal temperature. This could lead to misinterpretation of the TMT, if comparing the result to a rectal temperature range. The aim of this study was to establish a normal canine TMT reference range. Four hundred and sixteen TMTs were taken from 157 healthy dogs, in a range of ambient temperatures. The normal reference range for canine TMT was found to be 36.6–38.8°C. This range should be considered by pet owners and veterinary professionals when interpreting TMT measured with a veterinary aural thermometer, to avoid misinterpretation of the results.     

老年病人腋下体温测量时间的探讨

目的 探讨使用玻璃水银体温计为老年病人测量腋下体温所需的较好时间.方法 分为实验组78例,平均年龄79岁;对照组52例,平均年龄33.5岁.取3支符合测量要求的体温表,同时置于受试者的同侧腋下,于测量时间满5,10,15 min时分别取出,记录测得的体温值,进行统计学分析.结果 实验组5,10,15 min测得体温分别为(36.01±0.54),(36.30±0.41),(36.45±0.37)℃,(P<0.01);对照组5,10,15 min测得体温分别为(36.11±0.37),(36.64±0.34),(36.87±0.29)℃,(P<0.01).3组比较,差异有统计学意义.实验组与对照组组间比较,5 min组无统计学意义;10,15 min组有统计学意义(P<0.05).结论 老年组病人各时间段体温均较年轻组为低;老年病人测量体温,在条件允许的情况下测量15 min更接近其真实的体内温度,10 min测量时间可能比较适合于临床应用,5 min测量时间不能够正确反映体内温度.     

Concordance of temperature measurements in the preterm and term neonate using three thermometers

BackgroundMeasuring temperature is an essential part of nursing care. It has been widely accepted as an indication of a patients' clinical condition. Often this enables early intervention and/or treatment as a change in body temperature can indicate the presence of infection or disorders of the thermoregulatory system.ObjectiveThe purpose to this study was to investigate agreement between the BD digital thermometer, the Genius 2 ? tympanic thermometer and the SureTemp^® Plus 692 thermometer.MethodA comparative design was used to evaluate the level of agreement between each thermometer in preterm and term infants, ranging from 24 weeks gestation to post term.ResultsA total of 238 infants were enrolled in the study, 52 infants with less than 28 weeks gestation, 112 with 29–36 weeks, 69 infants with more than 36 weeks. In general, BD digital and SureTemp^® Plus 692 measurements were in closer agreement than the BD digital and the Genius 2? tympanic thermometer. The mean difference between the BD digital and the SureTemp^® Plus 692 measurements was ?0.185 (±2 SD: ?0.561 to 0.91). The mean difference between the BD digital and Genius 2? was ?0.368 (±2 SD: ?1.078 to 0.342). The BD digital and SureTemp^® Plsu692 showed a negative but non-significant (r = ?0.07; p = 0.273) correlation between the differences and the averages of the measurements. The correlation of the differences and the averages of the BD digital and Genius 2? measurements was also negative and significant (r = ?0.53; p < 0.001).ConclusionThe results of the study suggested that the SureTemp^® Plus 692 thermometer can be used as a reasonable alternative to the BD Digital thermometer in the neonatal population.     

The effects of measurement site and ambient temperature on body temperature values in healthy older adults: A cross-sectional comparative study

Background

Accurate baseline body temperature measurement is essential for assessment. Tympanic membrane temperature (TMT) measurement is popular, but there is no consensus on whether it is as accurate as oral temperature (OT) for use with the elderly at varying ambient temperature levels.

Objectives

To test agreement between TMT and OT measurement of body temperature among an elderly population; and to explore whether agreement between the two sites depends on ambient temperature.

Design

A cross-sectional comparison study.

Methods

Two samples of older community-dwelling adults were recruited from 17 community senior citizen centers in Taipei, Taiwan in winter (n = 262) and summer (n = 257) of 2007. TMT and OT were simultaneously measured by electronic infrared ear thermometer and electronic digital thermometer. Ambient temperatures measured by digital thermo-hygrometer of the data collection setting were recorded when body temperature was taken.

Results

In winter mean TMT was 36.64 °C (S.D. 0.37), and mean OT was 36.74 °C (S.D. 0.18). In summer, the mean TMT was 37.05 °C (S.D. 0.30) and mean OT was 36.85 °C (S.D. 0.22). The relationship between TMT and OT were r = 0.42 (p < 0.001) in winter and r = 0.57 (p < 0.001) in summer. The values of OT were used as standard to assess the accuracy of the measurement. The bias between TMT and OT was −0.10 °C (S.D. 0.34) and 95% limits of agreement were 0.57 and −0.77 °C in winter; and bias was 0.20 °C (S.D. 0.25) and 95% limits of agreement were 0.69 and −0.29 °C in summer. The findings of this study demonstrate that the TMT has high variability that may under or over estimate body temperatures.

Conclusions

There is a lack of agreement in body temperatures values between TMT and OT in community-dwelling elderly in both winter and summer. OT was more stable than TMT regardless of ambient temperature influences. Therefore, the oral cavity is preferable to the TM site for temperature measurement in alert elderly. The limitation of this study is that hospitalized patients who are most likely to need temperature measurement are not included in this study.     

Evaluation of chemical dot thermometers for measuring body temperature of orally intubated patients.

BACKGROUND: Recent research indicates that oral measurement of body temperature is a reliable option in orally intubated patients. In situations such as protective isolation, where dedicated electronic thermometers are not available, are single-use chemical dot thermometers an acceptable alternative? OBJECTIVE: To determine the accuracy of single-use chemical dot thermometers in orally intubated adult patients. METHODS: Subjects included a convenience sample of 85 adult patients admitted to 1 of 2 intensive care units (surgical trauma and neuroscience). For each patient, oral temperatures were measured concurrently (within 5 minutes) with a chemical dot thermometer and an electronic thermometer. The sequence of temperature measurements was alternated with each subsequent patient. Both thermometers were placed in the same posterior sublingual pocket opposite the side of the endotracheal tube. RESULTS: Measurements obtained with electronic and single-use chemical dot thermometers correlated strongly (r = 0.937). With the chemical dot thermometer, body temperature was overestimated in 11.8% of the measurements and underestimated in 10.8% of the measurements by 0.4 degree C or more. The difference between oral temperatures measured with the 2 different thermometers was not related to the patient's age, sex, or sublingual pocket location or to the order of thermometer use. CONCLUSION: The chemical dot thermometer is useful and reliable for measuring body temperature of orally intubated patients. When measurements of body temperature have important consequences for decisions about treatment, clinicians should use an electronic thermometer to confirm measurements made with a chemical dot thermometer.     

水银体温计测量腋窝体温放置时间的研究及其Meta分析

目的 比较腋窝测量体温时水银体温计放置5 min与10 min所得体温值有无差别.方法 用方便抽样的方法抽取右江民族医学院附属医院住院患者365例,用同一支体温计连续测量同侧腋窝温度5 min与10 min,对测量结果进行比较.检索各数据库,获取相关研究数据,用Meta分析的方法对纳入研究的6篇文献进行分析.结果 在α=0.05水准上,用配对t检验对测量腋温5 min与10 min所得体温值进行检验,差异显著;Meta分析的结果也证明两者差异显著.用365例受试者的体温数据做出的Bland-Altman图显示,2种测量时间所得体温值的差异在临床上不可接受.结论 用水银体温计测腋温时体温计放置时间应持续10 min更为科学.