Performance of a non-contact infrared thermometer in healthy newborns

Non-Contact Infrared Thermometers and Thermal Scanners for Human Body Temperature Monitoring: A Systematic Review

In recent years, non-contact infrared thermometers (NCITs) and infrared thermography (IRT) have gained prominence as convenient, non-invasive tools for human body temperature measurement. Despite their widespread adoption in a range of settings, there remain questions about their accuracy under varying conditions. This systematic review sought to critically evaluate the performance of NCITs and IRT in body temperature monitoring, synthesizing evidence from a total of 72 unique settings from 32 studies. The studies incorporated in our review ranged from climate-controlled room investigations to clinical applications. Our primary findings showed that NCITs and IRT can provide accurate and reliable body temperature measurements in specific settings and conditions. We revealed that while both NCITs and IRT displayed a consistent positive correlation with conventional, contact-based temperature measurement tools, NCITs demonstrated slightly superior accuracy over IRT. A total of 29 of 50 settings from NCIT studies and 4 of 22 settings from IRT studies achieved accuracy levels within a range of ±0.3 °C. Furthermore, we found that several factors influenced the performance of these devices. These included the measurement location, the type of sensor, the reference and tool, individual physiological attributes, and the surrounding environmental conditions. Our research underscores the critical need for further studies in this area to refine our understanding of these influential factors and to develop standardized guidelines for the use of NCITs and IRT.

Assessment of Alternative Body Points for Temperature Screening As Precautionary Screening During the Pandemic Using Infrared Thermometry

BACKGROUND

The recent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, which swept across the globe in a short period, demonstrated that disease transmission management is a critical step in preventing an outbreak, as is good viral infectious disease screening. Infrared thermography (IRT) has long been considered ideal for screening body temperatures during pandemics.

METHODS

Single-centre cross-sectional study with 159 participants. Using infrared thermometry, participants were subjected to temperature measurement twice daily on various sites. This was compared to oral temperature.

RESULTS

The findings of the study revealed that infrared thermometry could be utilised as a proxy approach for screening by both individuals and medical professionals when employed at the glabella, cubits, or axillae.

CONCLUSION

 Temperature screening is implied as a prophylactic method during pandemics. Owing to contact limitations, oral thermometry cannot be used for mass screening during the pandemic. Infrared thermometry is a noncontact method of temperature screening that can readily be applied for mass temperature screening in congested venues such as airports, shopping malls, places of public convenience, and other similar locations.

Clinical Accuracy of Non-Contact Forehead Infrared Thermometer Measurement in Children: An Observational Study

We evaluated the clinical reliability and utility of temperature measurements using no-contact forehead infrared thermometers (NCFITs) by comparing their temperature measurements with those obtained using infrared tympanic thermometers (IRTTs) in children. In this observational, prospective, and cross-sectional study, we enrolled 255 children (aged 1 month to 18 years) from the pediatric surgery ward at a tertiary medical center in Korea. The mean age of the children was 9.05 ± 5.39 years, and 54.9% were boys. The incidence rate of fever, defined as an IRTT reading of ≥38.0 °C, was 15.7%. The ICC coefficient for the assessment of agreement between temperatures recorded by the NCFIT and IRTT was 0.87, and the κ-coefficient was 0.83. The bias and 95% limits of agreement were 0.15 °C (−0.43 to 0.73). For an accurate diagnosis of fever (≥38 °C), the false-negative rate was much lower, but the false-positive rate was higher, especially in 6-year-old children. Therefore, NCFITs can be used to screen children for fever. However, a secondary check is required using another thermometer when the child’s temperature is >38 °C. NCFITs are proposed for screening but not for measuring the temperature. For the latter, an accurate and reliable thermometer shall be used.

A novel method for measuring sublingual temperature using conventional non-contact forehead thermometer

Background: Sublingual temperature measurement is a quick and accurate representation of oral temperature and corresponds closely with core temperature. Sub-lingual temperature measurement using non-contact infrared thermometers has not been studied for this purpose and if accurate they would be a reliable and convenient way of recording temperature of a patient very quickly. The aim of the study was to evaluate the utility of recording sublingual temperature using an infrared non-contact thermometer and establish its accuracy by comparing the readings with tympanic thermometer recordings. Methods: This cross-sectional study was carried out in 29 patients (328 paired recordings from sublingual and tympanic sites simultaneously). Subjects were requested to keep their mouth closed for five minutes before recording the temperature. Sublingual recordings were performed for each patient at different times of the day using an infrared thermometer. The infrared thermometer was quickly brought 1cm away from the sublingual part of the tongue and the recordings were then done immediately. Readings were compared with the corresponding tympanic temperature. Results: The non-contact sublingual temperature correlated very closely with tympanic temperature (r=0.86, p<0.001). The mean difference between the infrared sublingual and tympanic temperature was 0.21°C (standard deviation [SD]:0.48°C, 95% confidence interval [CI] of 0.16-0.27). The intra-class correlation co-efficient (ICC) between core and sublingual temperatures was 0.830 (95% CI: 0.794 to 0.861) p<0.001. The sensitivity of sublingual IR (infrared) temperature of 37.65°C was 90% and specificity was 89% for core temperature >38°C. Conclusions: This innovative modification of using the forehead infrared thermometer to measure the sublingual temperature offers an accurate, rapid and non-contact estimation of core temperature.

A novel method for measuring sublingual temperature using conventional non-contact forehead thermometer

Background: Sublingual temperature measurement is a quick and accurate representation of oral temperature and corresponds closely with core temperature. Sub-lingual temperature measurement using non-contact infrared thermometers has not been studied for this purpose and if accurate they would be a reliable and convenient way of recording temperature of a patient very quickly. The aim of the study was to evaluate the utility of recording sublingual temperature using an infrared non-contact thermometer and establish its accuracy by comparing the readings with tympanic thermometer recordings. Methods: This cross-sectional study was carried out in 29 patients (328 paired recordings from sublingual and tympanic sites simultaneously). Subjects were requested to keep their mouth closed for five minutes before recording the temperature. Sublingual recordings were performed for each patient at different times of the day using an infrared thermometer. The infrared thermometer was quickly brought 1cm away from the sublingual part of the tongue and the recordings were then done immediately. Readings were compared with the corresponding tympanic temperature. Results: The non-contact sublingual temperature correlated very closely with tympanic temperature (r=0.86, p<0.001). The mean difference between the infrared sublingual and tympanic temperature was 0.21°C (standard deviation [SD]:0.48°C, 95% confidence interval [CI] of 0.16-0.27). The intra-class correlation co-efficient (ICC) between core and sublingual temperatures was 0.830 (95% CI: 0.794 to 0.861) p<0.001. The sensitivity of sublingual IR (infrared) temperature of 37.65°C was 90% and specificity was 89% for core temperature >38°C. Conclusions: This innovative modification of using the forehead infrared thermometer to measure the sublingual temperature offers an accurate, rapid and non-contact estimation of core temperature.

A novel method for measuring sublingual temperature using conventional non-contact forehead thermometer

Background: Sublingual temperature measurement is a quick and accurate representation of oral temperature and corresponds closely with core temperature. Sub-lingual temperature measurement using non-contact infrared thermometers has not been studied for this purpose and if accurate they would be a reliable and convenient way of recording temperature of a patient very quickly. The aim of the study was to evaluate the utility of recording sublingual temperature using an infrared non-contact thermometer and establish its accuracy by comparing the readings with tympanic thermometer recordings. Methods: This cross-sectional study was carried out in 29 patients (328 paired recordings from sublingual and tympanic sites simultaneously). Subjects were requested to keep their mouth closed for five minutes before recording the temperature. Sublingual recordings were performed for each patient at different times of the day using an infrared thermometer. The infrared thermometer was quickly brought 1cm away from the sublingual part of the tongue and the recordings were then done immediately. Readings were compared with the corresponding tympanic temperature. Results: The non-contact sublingual temperature correlated very closely with tympanic temperature (r=0.86, p<0.001). The mean difference between the infrared sublingual and tympanic temperature was 0.21°C (standard deviation [SD]:0.48°C, 95% confidence interval [CI] of 0.16-0.27). The intra-class correlation co-efficient (ICC) between core and sublingual temperatures was 0.830 (95% CI: 0.794 to 0.861) p<0.001. The sensitivity of sublingual IR (infrared) temperature of 37.65°C was 90% and specificity was 89% for core temperature >38°C. Conclusions: This innovative modification of using the forehead infrared thermometer to measure the sublingual temperature offers an accurate, rapid and non-contact estimation of core temperature.

Regression model for predicting core body temperature in infrared thermal mass screening

With fever being one of the most prominent symptoms of COVID-19, the implementation of fever screening has become commonplace around the world to help mitigate the spread of the virus. Non-contact methods of temperature screening, such as infrared (IR) forehead thermometers and thermal cameras, benefit by minimizing infection risk. However, the IR temperature measurements may not be reliably correlated with actual core body temperatures. This study proposed a trained model prediction using IR-measured facial feature temperatures to predict core body temperatures comparable to an FDA-approved product. The reference core body temperatures were measured by a commercially available temperature monitoring system. Optimal inputs and training models were selected by the correlation between predicted and reference core body temperature. Five regression models were tested during the study. The linear regression model showed the lowest minimum-root-mean-square error (RSME) compared with reference temperatures. The temple and nose region of interest (ROI) were identified as optimal inputs. This study suggests that IR temperature data could provide comparatively accurate core body temperature prediction for rapid mass screening of potential COVID cases using the linear regression model. Using linear regression modeling, the non-contact temperature measurement could be comparable to the SpotOn system with a mean SD of ± 0.285 °C and MAE of 0.240 °C.

Wearable Sensors for Remote Health Monitoring: Potential Applications for Early Diagnosis of Covid-19

Wearable sensors are emerging as a new technology to detect physiological and biochemical markers for remote health monitoring. By measuring vital signs such as respiratory rate, body temperature, and blood oxygen level, wearable sensors offer tremendous potential for the noninvasive and early diagnosis of numerous diseases such as Covid-19. Over the past decade, significant progress has been made to develop wearable sensors with high sensitivity, accuracy, flexibility, and stretchability, bringing to reality a new paradigm of remote health monitoring. In this review paper, the latest advances in wearable sensor systems that can measure vital signs at an accuracy level matching those of point-of-care tests are presented. In particular, the focus of this review is placed on wearable sensors for measuring respiratory behavior, body temperature, and blood oxygen level, which are identified as the critical signals for diagnosing and monitoring Covid-19. Various designs based on different materials and working mechanisms are summarized. This review is concluded by identifying the remaining challenges and future opportunities for this emerging field.

Non-contact infrared thermometers compared with current approaches in primary care for children aged 5 years and under: a method comparison study

BACKGROUND

Current options for temperature measurement in children presenting to primary care include either electronic axillary or infrared tympanic thermometers. Non-contact infrared thermometers could reduce both the distress of the child and the risk of cross-infection.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to compare the use of non-contact thermometers with the use of electronic axillary and infrared tympanic thermometers in children presenting to primary care.

DESIGN

Method comparison study with a nested qualitative study.

SETTING

Primary care in Oxfordshire.

PARTICIPANTS

Children aged ≤ 5 years attending with an acute illness.

INTERVENTIONS

Two types of non-contact infrared thermometers [i.e. Thermofocus (Tecnimed, Varese, Italy) and Firhealth (Firhealth, Shenzhen, China)] were compared with an electronic axillary thermometer and an infrared tympanic thermometer.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was agreement between the Thermofocus non-contact infrared thermometer and the axillary thermometer. Secondary outcomes included agreement between all other sets of thermometers, diagnostic accuracy for detecting fever, parental and child ratings of acceptability and discomfort, and themes arising from our qualitative interviews with parents.

RESULTS

A total of 401 children (203 boys) were recruited, with a median age of 1.6 years (interquartile range 0.79-3.38 years). The readings of the Thermofocus non-contact infrared thermometer differed from those of the axillary thermometer by -0.14 °C (95% confidence interval -0.21 to -0.06 °C) on average with the lower limit of agreement being -1.57 °C (95% confidence interval -1.69 to -1.44 °C) and the upper limit being 1.29 °C (95% confidence interval 1.16 to 1.42 °C). The readings of the Firhealth non-contact infrared thermometer differed from those of the axillary thermometer by -0.16 °C (95% confidence interval -0.23 to -0.09 °C) on average, with the lower limit of agreement being -1.54 °C (95% confidence interval -1.66 to -1.41 °C) and the upper limit being 1.22 °C (95% confidence interval 1.10 to 1.34 °C). The difference between the first and second readings of the Thermofocus was -0.04 °C (95% confidence interval -0.07 to -0.01 °C); the lower limit was -0.56 °C (95% confidence interval -0.60 to -0.51 °C) and the upper limit was 0.47 °C (95% confidence interval 0.43 to 0.52 °C). The difference between the first and second readings of the Firhealth thermometer was 0.01 °C (95% confidence interval -0.02 to 0.04 °C); the lower limit was -0.60 °C (95% confidence interval -0.65 to -0.54 °C) and the upper limit was 0.61 °C (95% confidence interval 0.56 to 0.67 °C). Sensitivity and specificity for the Thermofocus non-contact infrared thermometer were 66.7% (95% confidence interval 38.4% to 88.2%) and 98.0% (95% confidence interval 96.0% to 99.2%), respectively. For the Firhealth non-contact infrared thermometer, sensitivity was 12.5% (95% confidence interval 1.6% to 38.3%) and specificity was 99.4% (95% confidence interval 98.0% to 99.9%). The majority of parents found all methods to be acceptable, although discomfort ratings were highest for the axillary thermometer. The non-contact thermometers required fewer readings than the comparator thermometers.

LIMITATIONS

A method comparison study does not compare new methods against a reference standard, which in this case would be central thermometry requiring the placement of a central line, which is not feasible or acceptable in primary care. Electronic axillary and infrared tympanic thermometers have been found to have moderate agreement themselves with central temperature measurements.

CONCLUSIONS

The 95% limits of agreement are > 1 °C for both non-contact infrared thermometers compared with electronic axillary and infrared tympanic thermometers, which could affect clinical decision-making. Sensitivity for fever was low to moderate for both non-contact thermometers.

FUTURE WORK

Better methods for peripheral temperature measurement that agree well with central thermometry are needed.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN15413321.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 53. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Evaluating the interchangeability of infrared and digital devices with the traditional mercury thermometer in hospitalized pediatric patients: an observational study

Gradual replacement of the mercury thermometers with alternative devices is ongoing around the world in a bid to protect human health and the environment from the adverse effects of mercury. However, to reduce the risks of misdiagnosis, unnecessary treatments, and omission of care in pediatric populations, more evidence on the reliability of alternative thermometers is needed. The aim of this comparative observational study was to detect any differences in temperature measurements between the use of the axillary mercury thermometer and the alternative techniques. Temperature values in degree Celsius (°C) were measured in a group of Albanian children aged up to 14 years using mercury and digital axillary thermometers, as well as forehead and tympanic infrared thermometers. The digital axillary device, compared with the mercury one, showed no clinically significant difference in the mean values (− 0.04 ± 0.29 °C) and the narrowest 95% level of agreement (+ 0.53 °C to − 0.62 °C) in the paired comparisons. For cut-off point of 37.5 °C, the digital axillary thermometer showed the highest levels of sensitivity (72.5%) and specificity (99.1%) in detecting fever. This study indicates that the digital axillary thermometer may be the better option since it adequately balances accuracy, safety, and children’s comfort.

Clinical accuracy of non-contact forehead infrared thermometer and infrared tympanic thermometer in postoperative adult patients: A comparative study

Core temperature monitoring is important for the assessment and prevention of possible postoperative complications. The aim of the present study was to examine the agreement between the core temperature values and the forehead, tympanic membrane and axillary values in postoperative adult patients in clinical practice. The study measured the core temperature of 65 patients undergoing scheduled abdominal surgery using SpotOn™ and compared these with those obtained using non-contact forehead infrared, infrared tympanic and axillary thermometers. Correlation and Bland-Altman analyses were conducted for these comparisons. All temperatures were recorded at 4h intervals after postoperative arrival to the ward. Forehead temperature recordings showed a good correlation with the core temperature with excellent accuracy and was comparable to the tympanic temperature. Both forehead and tympanic thermometers can rapidly and effectively measure the core temperature during early postoperative period. Considering patients' safety, non-contact forehead infrared thermometers may be useful for postoperative monitoring.

Management of acute fever in children: Consensus recommendations for community and primary healthcare providers in sub-Saharan Africa

Fever is one of the most common reasons for unwell children presenting to pharmacists and primary healthcare practitioners. Currently there are no guidelines for assessment and management of fever specifically for community and primary healthcare workers in the sub-Saharan Africa region. This multidisciplinary consensus guide was developed to assist pharmacists and primary healthcare workers in sub-Saharan Africa to risk stratify and manage children who present with fever, decide when to refer, and how to advise parents and caregivers. Fever is defined as body temperature ≥ 37.5 °C and is a normal physiological response to illness that facilitates and accelerates recovery. Although it is often associated with self-limiting illness, it causes significant concern to both parents and attending healthcare workers. Clinical signs may be used by pharmacy staff and primary healthcare workers to determine level of distress and to distinguish between a child with fever who is at high risk of serious illness and who requires specific treatment, hospitalisation or specialist care, and those at low risk who could be managed conservatively at home. In children with warning signs, serious causes of fever that may need to be excluded include infections (including malaria), non-infective inflammatory conditions and malignancy. Simple febrile convulsions are not in themselves harmful, and are not necessarily indicative of serious infection. In the absence of illness requiring specific treatment, relief from distress is the primary indication for prescribing pharmacotherapy, and antipyretics should not be administered with the sole intention of reducing body temperature. Care must be taken not to overdose medications and clear instructions should be given to parents/caregivers on managing the child at home and when to seek further medical care.

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

Objective

In 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).

Methods

Forty-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.

Results

A 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.

Conclusion

The 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.

Evaluation of a wearable wireless device with artificial intelligence, iThermonitor WT705, for continuous temperature monitoring for patients in surgical wards: a prospective comparative study

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate a new-generation, non-invasive, wireless axillary thermometer with artificial intelligence, iThermonitor (WT705, Raiing Medical, Beijing, China), and to ascertain its feasibility for perioperative continuous body temperature monitoring in surgical patients.

SETTING

Departments of Biliary Surgery and Operating Room and the post-anaesthesia care unit of a university teaching hospital in Chengdu, China.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 526 adult surgical patients were consecutively enrolled.

DESIGN

This was a prospective observational study. Axillary temperatures were continuously recorded with iThermonitor throughout the whole perioperative period. The temperatures of the contralateral armpit were measured with mercury thermometers at 8:00, 12:00, 16:00 and 20:00 every day and were used as references.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The outcomes were the accuracy and precision of the temperatures measured with iThermonitor, the validity to detect fever and the feasibility of continuous wear. Pairs of temperatures were evaluated with Student's t-test, Pearson's correlation and repeated-measures Bland-Altman plot.

RESULTS

A total of 3621 pairs of body temperatures were obtained. The temperatures measured with iThermonitor agreed with those measured with the mercury thermometers overall, with a mean difference of 0.03°C±0.35°C and a moderate correlation (r=0.755, p<0.001). The 95% limits of agreement (LoA) ranged from -0.63°C to 0.73°C, with 5.11% of the differences outside the 95% LoA. The intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.753. Continuous temperature monitoring captured more fevers than intermittent observation (117/526 vs 91/526, p<0.001), detected fever up to 4.35 hours earlier, and captured a higher peak temperature (0.29°C±0.27°C, 95% CI: 0.26-0.31). All subjects felt that wearing iThermonitor was more or less comfortable and did not affect their daily activities.

CONCLUSIONS

iThermonitor is promising for continuous remote temperature monitoring in surgical patients. However, further developments are still needed to improve the precision of this device, especially for temperature detection in underweight patients and those with lower body temperature.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ChiCTR1900024549; Results (registered on 5 July 2019).

Evaluating the Interchangeability of Forehead, Tympanic, and Axillary Thermometers in Italian Paediatric Clinical Settings: Results of a Multicentre Observational Study

PURPOSE

This study was conducted to investigate the interchangeability of infrared forehead, digital axillary, and infrared tympanic thermometers while identifying the most reliable non-invasive body temperature measurement method in paediatric settings.

DESIGN AND METHODS

A multicentre observational study was conducted enrolling all children less than or equal to 14 years of age requiring a temperature measurement and after obtaining their parent's informed consent. Socio-demographic characteristics and temperature values in Celsius (°C) were simultaneously collected using forehead, axillary, and tympanic thermometers.

RESULTS

A total of 433 children were enrolled, 57.5% were male and the mean age was 5.3 ± 3.9 years. The average value of tympanic temperature (37.05 °C) was higher than forehead (36.87 °C) and axillary (36.8 °C). The mean difference between axillary and forehead temperatures (-0.06 °C) was not statistically significant (p = 0.158). Comparing the measurements of each type of thermometer with the overall average of the three measurements recorded as the virtual gold standard, Bland Altman analysis highlighted tympanic with narrower 95% limits of agreement (+0.96 °C to -0.68 °C). The tympanic thermometer also had the highest percentage (81.6%) of differences falling within the maximum clinically acceptable difference (±0.5 °C).

CONCLUSIONS

Differences between paired measurements of the three investigated devices demonstrated the devices are not interchangeable. Measurements using the tympanic thermometer more closely resembled the reference temperature indicating its preferential use in paediatric clinical practice.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

To safely and consistently measure body temperature, nurses should not assume peripheral thermometers are interchangeable. It is essential to clinically validate all temperature values with clinical observations.

Non-contact infrared versus axillary and tympanic thermometers in children attending primary care: a mixed-methods study of accuracy and acceptability

BACKGROUND

Guidelines recommend measuring temperature in children presenting with fever using electronic axillary or tympanic thermometers. Non-contact thermometry offers advantages, yet has not been tested against recommended methods in primary care.

AIM

To compare two different non-contact infrared thermometers (NCITs) to axillary and tympanic thermometers in children aged ≤5 years visiting their GP with an acute illness.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Method comparison study with nested qualitative component.

METHOD

Temperature measurements were taken with electronic axillary (Welch Allyn SureTemp®), electronic tympanic (Braun Thermoscan®), NCIT Thermofocus® 0800, and NCIT Firhealth Forehead. Parents rated acceptability and discomfort. Qualitative interviews explored parents' experiences of the thermometers.

RESULTS

In total, 401 children were recruited (median age 1.6 years, 50.62% male). Mean difference between the Thermofocus NCIT and axillary thermometer was -0.14°C (95% confidence interval [CI] = -0.21 to -0.06°C); lower limit of agreement was -1.57°C (95% CI = -1.69 to -1.44°C) and upper limit 1.29°C (95% CI = 1.16 to 1.42°C). A second NCIT (Firhealth) had similar levels of agreement; however, the limits of agreement between tympanic and axillary thermometers were also wide. Parents expressed a preference for the practicality and comfort of NCITs, and were mostly negative about their child's experience of axillary thermometers. But there was willingness to adopt whichever device was medically recommended.

CONCLUSION

In a primary care paediatric population, temperature measurements with NCITs varied by >1°C compared with axillary and tympanic approaches. But there was also poor agreement between tympanic and axillary thermometers. Since clinical guidelines often rely on specific fever thresholds, clinicians should interpret peripheral thermometer readings with caution and in the context of a holistic assessment of the child.

Ingestible sensors correlate closely with peripheral temperature measurements in febrile patients

BACKGROUNDS

Reliable non-invasive methods for measuring body temperature are essential for the diagnosis and monitoring of infectious disease.

METHODS

This study used Intraclass Correlation Coefficients (ICC) and the Bland- Altman plot to analyse the agreement between temperature measurements using an ingestible capsule sensor, a skin sensor and two non-invasive peripheral temperature measurements (axillary and infrared non-contact), collected from a population of febrile patient admitted for infectious disease.

RESULTS

Of the 77 febrile patients screened, 26 patients were enrolled. The ICC between axillary temperature measurements (Taxi) vs. non-contact measurements (Tno-c) were 0.34 [-0.18; 0.63], 0.87 [0.55; 0.94] between Taxi vs. ingestible capsule measurements (Tcap) and 0.12 [-0.09; 0.37] between Taxi vs. Tetac. The mean difference between Taxi vs Tno-c was -1.18 °C with limits of agreement (LoA) from -2.96 to 0.58 °C. The mean difference between Taxi vs Tcap was 0.48 °C, with LoA from -0.60 to 1.56 °C. The mean difference between Taxi vs Tetac was -4.23 °C with LoA from -7.22 to -1.23 °C.

CONCLUSIONS

Ingestible capsule measurements are reliable enough to adequately estimate the core body temperature in clinical practice. Its non-invasiveness, and the real-time remote control offer new opportunities for future research into fever during infectious diseases.

A Systematic Review on the Value of Infrared Thermography in the Early Detection of Periprosthetic Joint Infections

BACKGROUND

Variations in the temperature of body and skin are symptoms of many pathological changes. Although joint replacement surgery of hip and knee has been very successful in recent decades, periprosthetic infection is a growing problem and the number one reason for revision. While many studies have investigated changes in blood levels, investigation of temperature has not been performed on a regular basis. The objective of this work is to determine whether reference literature exists for the infrared thermographic examination in knee and hip arthroplasty and if reference values can be derived for the methodology or if there is a peri- and postoperative benefit.

MATERIAL UND METHODS

By means of a systematic online database search and based on the Cochrane, PICOT and PRISMA guidelines, this systematic review retrieved 254 studies. All publications with thermographic examination in arthroplasty of the hip and knee were imbedded. 249 studies were excluded due to the defined inclusion and exclusion criteria and five studies with 251 patients have finally been included in the evaluation process. This was followed by an analysis and discussion of the methodology.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

Infrared thermography is a useful tool in the perioperative care of patients after arthroplasty of the knee and hip joint. The technology is portable, easy to use and non-invasive. Based only on these few publications, values can be derived, which provide a guidance for the thermographic aftercare in arthroplasty surgery.

Videothermometry to evaluate metabolic activity in real time during pneumectomy in rats

PURPOSE

To evaluate, in rats, the open field videothermometry in real time while performing left pneumonectomy for early diagnosis of cardiopulmonary changes.

METHODS

Twelve non-specific pathogen-free Wistar rats were randomly allocated into two groups; pneumectomy group (GP) and sham surgery group (GS). Mean arterial pressure, videothermometry in real time, of the right lung, and histopathological analysis of the remaining lung were evaluated in all animals.

RESULTS

Videothermometry in real time allowed identification of temperature variance of right lung after pneumectomy, indicating a significant decrease in temperature during evaluation. There was a statistical difference between M0 and M1, M1 and M2 and M0 and M2 (p<0.004) in GS, and significant difference between M0 and M1, M1 and M2, and M2 and M0 with p<0.0001 in GP.

CONCLUSIONS

Left pneumonectomy in rats shows initial histopathological changes after 60 minutes of its completion, indicating a possible compensation beginning. The open-field videothermometry in real time proved to be efficient identifying the temperature changes of the remaining lung.

Digital Axillary and Non-Contact Infrared Thermometers for Children

Axillary digital thermometers (ADTs) and non-contact (infrared) forehead thermometers (NCIFTs) are commonly used in pediatric settings, where an incorrect body temperature measurement may delay treatments or lead to incorrect diagnoses and therapies. Several studies comparing ADT or NCIFT with other methods have found conflicting results. To investigate whether ADT and NCIFT can be used interchangeably, a comparative observational study was conducted involving 205 children aged 0 to 14 years who were consecutively admitted to the pediatric emergency department. The Bland–Altman plot illustrated agreement between the two methods. A total of 217 pairs of measurements were compared; axillary measurements showed average values significantly higher than forehead measurements (37.52°C and 37.12°C; t = 7.42, p = .000), with a mean difference of 0.41°C between the two methods (range = −1.80 and +2.40). In this setting and population, ADT and NCIFT cannot be used interchangeably.