Literature DB >> 27657715

Comparison of Microchip Transponder and Noncontact Infrared Thermometry with Rectal Thermometry in Domestic Swine (Sus scrofa domestica).

Amanda L Jara1, Jarod M Hanson2, Jon D Gabbard3, Scott K Johnson1, Emery T Register1, Biao He1, S Mark Tompkins4.   

Abstract

During disease outbreaks, core temperature is a useful health metric in swine, due to the presence of pyrexia especially during the acute phase of infection. Despite technologic advances in other facets of swine production and health management, rectal thermometry continues to be the 'gold standard' for measuring core body temperature. However, for various reasons, collecting rectal temperatures can be difficult and unsafe depending on the housing modality. In addition, the delay between insertion of the rectal thermometer and obtaining a reading can affect measurement accuracy, especially when the pig requires physical restraint. Clearly safer, faster, and more accurate and precise temperature acquisition methods that necessitate minimal or no handling of swine are needed. We therefore compared rectal thermometers, subcutaneous microchips, and an inexpensive handheld infrared thermometer by measuring the core body temperature of 24 male castrated piglets at random intervals over a 5-wk period. The core body temperature (mean ± 1 SD) was 39.3±0.5 °C by rectal thermometry, 39.0±0.7 °C by microchip transponder, and 34.3±1.0 °C by infrared thermometry; these 3 values differed significantly. Although the readings obtain by using infrared thermometry were numerically lower than those from the other methods, it is arguably the safest method for assessing the core temperature of swine and showed strong relative correlation with rectal temperature.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27657715      PMCID: PMC5029831     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci        ISSN: 1559-6109            Impact factor:   1.232


  16 in total

1.  Comparison of temperature readings from a percutaneous thermal sensing microchip with temperature readings from a digital rectal thermometer in equids.

Authors:  Tatiana R Robinson; Stephen B Hussey; Ashley E Hill; Carl C Heckendorf; Joe B Stricklin; Josie L Traub-Dargatz
Journal:  J Am Vet Med Assoc       Date:  2008-08-15       Impact factor: 1.936

2.  A microchip implant system as a method to determine body temperature of terminally ill rats and mice.

Authors:  W J Kort; J M Hekking-Weijma; M T TenKate; V Sorm; R VanStrik
Journal:  Lab Anim       Date:  1998-07       Impact factor: 2.471

3.  The Inability to Screen Exhibition Swine for Influenza A Virus Using Body Temperature.

Authors:  A S Bowman; J M Nolting; J D Workman; M Cooper; A E Fisher; B Marsh; T Forshey
Journal:  Zoonoses Public Health       Date:  2015-04-17       Impact factor: 2.702

4.  Relationship between mean body surface temperature measured by use of infrared thermography and ambient temperature in clinically normal pigs and pigs inoculated with Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae.

Authors:  J A Loughmiller; M F Spire; S S Dritz; B W Fenwick; M H Hosni; S B Hogge
Journal:  Am J Vet Res       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 1.156

5.  Comparison of three methods of temperature measurement in hypothermic, euthermic, and hyperthermic dogs.

Authors:  Rebecca J Greer; Leah A Cohn; John R Dodam; Colette C Wagner-Mann; F A Mann
Journal:  J Am Vet Med Assoc       Date:  2007-06-15       Impact factor: 1.936

6.  Comparison of rectal, microchip transponder, and infrared thermometry techniques for obtaining body temperature in the laboratory rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus).

Authors:  Patty H Chen; Charles E White
Journal:  J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 1.232

7.  Comparison of noncontact infrared thermometry and 3 commercial subcutaneous temperature transponding microchips with rectal thermometry in rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta).

Authors:  Marla K Brunell
Journal:  J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 1.232

8.  A comparison of rectal and subcutaneous body temperature measurement in the common marmoset.

Authors:  J Cilia; D C Piper; N Upton; J J Hagan
Journal:  J Pharmacol Toxicol Methods       Date:  1998-07       Impact factor: 1.950

9.  Detection of fever with infrared thermometry: a feasibility study.

Authors:  W T Hughes; G G Patterson; D Thornton; B J Williams; L Lott; R Dodge
Journal:  J Infect Dis       Date:  1985-08       Impact factor: 5.226

Review 10.  Infrared skin temperature measurements for monitoring health in pigs: a review.

Authors:  Dennis Dam Soerensen; Lene Juul Pedersen
Journal:  Acta Vet Scand       Date:  2015-02-03       Impact factor: 1.695

View more
  1 in total

1.  Non-Contact Evaluation of Pigs' Body Temperature Incorporating Environmental Factors.

Authors:  Guifeng Jia; Wei Li; Junyu Meng; Hequn Tan; Yaoze Feng
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2020-07-31       Impact factor: 3.576

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.