Literature DB >> 29292274

Rectal and Bladder Temperatures vs Forehead Core Temperatures Measured With SpotOn Monitoring System.

Hildy M Schell-Chaple1, Kathleen D Liu2, Michael A Matthay2, Kathleen A Puntillo2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Methods and frequency of temperature monitoring in intensive care unit patients vary widely. The recently available SpotOn system uses zero-heat-flux technology and offers a noninvasive method for continuous monitoring of core temperature of critical care patients at risk for alterations in body temperature.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate agreement between and precision of a zero-heat-flux thermometry system (SpotOn) and continuous rectal and urinary bladder thermometry during fever and defervescence in adult patients in intensive care units.
METHODS: Prospective comparison of SpotOn vs rectal and urinary bladder thermometry in eligible patients enrolled in a randomized clinical trial on the effect of acetaminophen on core body temperature and hemodynamic status.
RESULTS: A total of 748 paired temperature measurements from 38 patients who had both SpotOn monitoring and either continuous rectal or continuous bladder thermometry were analyzed. Temperatures during the study were from 36.6°C to 39.9°C. The mean difference for SpotOn compared with bladder thermometry was -0.07°C (SD, 0.24°C; 95% limits of agreement, ± 0.47°C [-0.54°C, 0.40°C]). The mean difference for SpotOn compared with rectal thermometry was -0.24°C (SD, 0.29°C; 95% limits of agreement, ± 0.57°C [-0.81°C, 0.33°C]). Most differences in temperature between methods were within ± 0.5°C in both groups (96% bladder and 85% rectal).
CONCLUSIONS: The SpotOn thermometry system has excellent agreement and good precision and is a potential alternative for noninvasive continuous monitoring of core temperature in critical care patients, especially when alternative methods are contraindicated or not available. ©2018 American Association of Critical-Care Nurses.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29292274     DOI: 10.4037/ajcc2018865

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Crit Care        ISSN: 1062-3264            Impact factor:   2.228


  5 in total

Review 1.  Accuracy and precision of zero-heat-flux temperature measurements with the 3M™ Bair Hugger™ Temperature Monitoring System: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Aaron Conway; Megan Bittner; Dan Phan; Kristina Chang; Navpreet Kamboj; Elizabeth Tipton; Matteo Parotto
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2020-06-02       Impact factor: 2.502

2.  Regression Model for Predicting Core body Temperature in Infrared Thermal Mass Screening.

Authors:  Chayabhan Limpabandhu; Frances Sophie Woodley Hooper; Rui Li; Zion Tse
Journal:  IPEM Transl       Date:  2022-07-15

3.  The focus of temperature monitoring with zero-heat-flux technology (3M Bair-Hugger): a clinical study with patients undergoing craniotomy.

Authors:  Eero Pesonen; Marja Silvasti-Lundell; Tomi T Niemi; Riku Kivisaari; Juha Hernesniemi; Marja-Tellervo Mäkinen
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2018-11-22       Impact factor: 2.502

Review 4.  Advances in Understanding the Human Urinary Microbiome and Its Potential Role in Urinary Tract Infection.

Authors:  Michael L Neugent; Neha V Hulyalkar; Vivian H Nguyen; Philippe E Zimmern; Nicole J De Nisco
Journal:  mBio       Date:  2020-04-28       Impact factor: 7.867

5.  Accuracy of zero-heat-flux thermometry and bladder temperature measurement in critically ill patients.

Authors:  Anselm Bräuer; Albulena Fazliu; Thorsten Perl; Daniel Heise; Konrad Meissner; Ivo Florian Brandes
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-12-10       Impact factor: 4.379

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.