OBJECTIVE: The objective in this study was to compare the accuracy of the tympanic membrane infrared thermometer with the other conventional temperature measurement options. METHODS: One hundred and ten randomly selected pediatric patients who admitted to our emergency room were included in the study. Each child underwent simultaneous temperature measurement via rectum, axilla, and external auditory canal. The rectal and axillary measurements were performed using conventional mercury in glass thermometers. The aural measurement was performed using the non-contact infrared thermometer (Braun ThermoScan IRT 1020, Germany). RESULTS: On aural measurement, the results of both ears as well as the first, second and third measurements were similar (P<0.01). The mean results of the axillary, rectal and tympanic temperature measurements were 37.46+/-1, 38.18+/-1, and 38.01+/-1.1, respectively. The mean axillary temperature was 0.72 degrees C lower than the mean rectal temperature, and 0.55 degrees C lower than the tympanic temperature. The difference between the mean tympanic and rectal temperatures was 0.17 degrees C. The results of measurements via rectum, axilla and ear were similar (P<0.01). CONCLUSION: In conclusion, it is apparent that each of the temperature measurement options has some advantages and disadvantages. An optimal thermometer should have the following features; accurate temperature measurement; ease of application in a short while; safety and absence of potential risks; and tolerability by the patient. Since the aural infrared thermometer meets these criteria, its use in the routine clinical practice appears to be advantageous rather than or complementary to the conventional methods.
OBJECTIVE: The objective in this study was to compare the accuracy of the tympanic membrane infrared thermometer with the other conventional temperature measurement options. METHODS: One hundred and ten randomly selected pediatric patients who admitted to our emergency room were included in the study. Each child underwent simultaneous temperature measurement via rectum, axilla, and external auditory canal. The rectal and axillary measurements were performed using conventional mercury in glass thermometers. The aural measurement was performed using the non-contact infrared thermometer (Braun ThermoScan IRT 1020, Germany). RESULTS: On aural measurement, the results of both ears as well as the first, second and third measurements were similar (P<0.01). The mean results of the axillary, rectal and tympanic temperature measurements were 37.46+/-1, 38.18+/-1, and 38.01+/-1.1, respectively. The mean axillary temperature was 0.72 degrees C lower than the mean rectal temperature, and 0.55 degrees C lower than the tympanic temperature. The difference between the mean tympanic and rectal temperatures was 0.17 degrees C. The results of measurements via rectum, axilla and ear were similar (P<0.01). CONCLUSION: In conclusion, it is apparent that each of the temperature measurement options has some advantages and disadvantages. An optimal thermometer should have the following features; accurate temperature measurement; ease of application in a short while; safety and absence of potential risks; and tolerability by the patient. Since the aural infrared thermometer meets these criteria, its use in the routine clinical practice appears to be advantageous rather than or complementary to the conventional methods.
Authors: Charlotte Christina Roossien; Audy Paul Hodselmans; Ronald Heus; Michiel Felix Reneman; Gijsbertus Jacob Verkerke Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-05-04 Impact factor: 3.390