玻璃汞柱式体温计检测方法的研究

[目的]探讨临床护理工作中体温计的实用检测方法。[方法]选取微波炉用塑料盒、不锈钢棉球缸和保温杯作为检测用容器，初步筛选出最佳容器，再选取正确率最高的容器探求每次检测体温计的最佳数量，最后配合简易支架进行体温计检测。[结果]3种容器之中保温杯为最佳容器，每次检测9支时正确率达83．01％，配合简易支架进行体温计的检测正确率达98．69％。[结论]可以使用保温杯配合简易支架替代恒温箱进行体温计的检测。     

用玻璃汞柱式体温计腋下测量体温所需时间探讨

体温是机体内在活动的一种客观反应，是衡量机体状况的一项指标。临床普遍采用玻璃汞柱式体温计(以下简称体温计)测量腋下体温，而测量时间沿袭陈维英主编的《基础护理学》第3版，腋下测量体温10min，但在临床应用过程中反映出诸多不便。本文就体温计腋下测量体温所需时间做实验分析，发现实际5min一样能测量出与10min一致的体温度数。现报告如下。     

红外线耳温计与玻璃汞柱体温计测量体温的比较

红外线耳温计是一种医用辐射性温度计，在2003年的“非典”防治中曾用于发热者的筛查，起到了重要的作用。目前已有部分医院用于临床测温。为了比较红外线耳温计与玻璃汞柱体温计测量体温的差异，我们进行了如下的实验，现报告如下。     

玻璃体温计测量体温的研究进展

介绍玻璃体温计的质量标准及检测,综述了玻璃体温计测量体温的研究现状,提出应规范玻璃体温计检测及测量体温方法。     

红外耳式体温计与玻璃体温计用于产妇测温的比较

目的探讨红外耳式体温计与玻璃体温计在体温测量中的差异,研究耳温、腋温和口温之间的关系。方珐随机抽取产科130例患者．其中体温正常者90例、发热者40例,采用自身对照的方法比较耳温、腋温和口温之间的差异。结果红外耳式体温计能反映正常体温变化,左、右耳的温度误差较小;发热组患者左、右耳温度无差异,但耳温、腋温和口温的差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。结论红外耳式体温计测温快速、安全,测量准确,使用简单方便,值得推广应用。     

体温计甩降仪小杯及消毒后体温计微生物学检测及分析

水银体温计目前仍然是各级医院测量体温的主要工具,越来越多的医院使用甩降仪来将水银柱降至35 ℃以下,目的是提高工作效率,节省护理人力资源.     

体温计甩降仪小杯及消毒后体温计微生物学检测及分析

水银体温计目前仍然是各级医院测量体温的主要工具,越来越多的医院使用甩降仪来将水银柱降至35℃以下,目的是提高工作效率,节省护理人力资源。为了解不同消毒频次的体温计甩降仪小杯染曹隋况及对体温计消毒效果的影响,开展本次研究。     

临床口腔体温计检测周期探讨

目的探讨临床上使用的口腔体温计的检测周期。方法选择4个不同产地的合格的口腔体温计各100支，在使用2周、4周、6周、8周、10周、12周后进行体温计的准确性检测。结果400支检测的体温计在使用2周、4周、6周、8周、10周、12周后，合格率分别是94.8％、90．7％、87．1％、80．7％、69．0％、52．7％，显示准确性逐渐下降。结论应该加强对使用中体温计准确性的检测，建议每2周检测1次。     

体温计检测方法的探讨

体温作为基本生命体征之一，护士每天都要用体温计为病人测量体温，其数值的准确直接影响医护人员对病人病情的判断、疾病的诊治和疗效的分析。定期做严格准确的体温计检测是我们提供准确体温数值的先决条件。在实际工作中，用传统法检测体温计时误差较大，使护士无法正确判断体温计是否合格。     

红外耳式体温计与水银柱式体温计用于恶性肿瘤患者测温的对比分析

目的 比较红外耳式体温计与水银柱式体温计测量恶性肿瘤患者体温的效果和效率.方法 随机抽取120例恶性肿瘤患者,其中体温正常者84例;发热者36例;对同一测试者先后采用红外耳式体温计测量鼓膜温度及水银柱式体温计测量口腔温度,比较两种测温方法测得体温值的差异和测温耗时.结果 无论是体温正常组还是发热组,采用红外耳式体温计测...     

A comparison of 2 methods of measuring rectal temperatures with digital thermometers.

BACKGROUND: Digital rectal thermometers typically have 2 distinct modes of operation: dwell or monitor, in which body temperature is displayed continuously, and predictive, in which body temperature is mathematically estimated on the basis of the curve of temperature rise that occurs after the thermometer is inserted. Although the dwell mode is generally considered more accurate, the predictive mode allows more rapid measurement. Direct comparisons of these 2 methods are lacking. OBJECTIVE: To determine if measurements of rectal temperatures obtained with the predictive mode differ significantly from those obtained with the dwell mode. METHODS: For each of 10 subjects, both dwell and predictive modes were used to measure early morning rectal temperature. For comparison of the 2 modes during states of temperature flux, 8 subjects had rectal temperatures measured after swimming in cold water. Initial predictive values were measured directly after each subject exited from the water. Initial dwell values were estimated by linear extrapolation of measured 3- and 6-minute dwell values. Paired-sample statistical methods were used to compare data. RESULTS: Measurements of early-morning temperatures obtained with the predictive mode did not differ significantly from those obtained with the dwell mode (P = .64). Predictive values also did not differ significantly from extrapolated dwell values for measurements obtained during mild temperature flux after immersion in cold water (P = .33). CONCLUSION: The predictive and dwell modes of digital rectal thermometers yield similar measurements of temperature during steady-state conditions and during states of mild temperature flux.     

A comparison of mercury and digital clinical thermometers

A primarily clinical trial has been undertaken to investigate and compare the use of mercury and digital thermometers in a ward situation. Both laboratory and clinical studies show that there is no significant difference in the average accuracy of the two types of thermometers, however there is a greater fluctuation of readings of temperature when using electronic thermometers. In clinical studies between 9 and 23% of repeated measurements using an electronic thermometer differ by 0.5 degrees C or more whilst the corresponding range for mercury thermometers is 0.6%. It is also shown that when making clinical measurements with mercury thermometers there is no clinical advantage in using a measurement time longer than 3 minutes.     

Temperature taking with glass thermometers: a review

This paper gives a review of the pertinent literature related to the use of clinical glass thermometers in body temperature recordings, historically and up to the present day. An attempt is made to give this commonly practised nursing procedure a scientific basis. Aspects of methods involved are discussed, particularly from the viewpoints of accuracy and safety. Some of the discrepancies inherent in current practice are pointed out and, where relevant, suggestions are made on the revision of this in the light of research findings and scientific data.     

充汞式玻璃体温计测温的风险及防范对策

充汞式玻璃体温计测温存在汞暴露、受伤和汞中毒等风险,从风险的现状出发,采取健全和改进制度流程、重点防范高危患者、尽量采用电子体温计测温等对策,使风险降至最低.     

两种体温计测量结果的比较

目的：了解液晶体温计与玻璃体温计体温测量结果有无差异。方法：用液晶体温计与玻璃体温计同时测量20位健康成年女性的口腔温度，对结果进行统计学处理。结果：两组测量数值无统计学意义(P＞0．05)。结论：液晶体温计在测量体温中与体温计同样有效，并且使用更安全、简便。     

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.