Infrared Thermometer: an accurate tool for temperature measurement during renal surgery

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of circumcision by freehand technique and Plastibell device in children

Background

Circumcision has been practiced since antiquity and is one of the most commonly performed surgical procedures. The aim of the study was to compare the efficacy and safety of the two most common techniques: Freehand and Plastibell techniques of circumcision.

Methods

The study was a prospective randomized study that was conducted on uncircumcised males at or below the age of 5 years that presented for circumcision. All boys who satisfied the inclusion criteria and whose parents consented, were randomized into two groups. Group A had freehand circumcision, while Group B had Plastibell circumcision. Patients were followed up at day 7 and day 28 postoperatively. The variables compared were operating time, cost, complications and parents’ satisfaction. All the data obtained were entered into a proforma. The data obtained were analyzed using SPSS version 20.

Results

A total of 110 boys were circumcised, 55 boys in each group. The median ages in the Plastibell and freehand groups were one and three months respectively. The mean operating time was significantly shorter in the Plastibell group compared to freehand (3.53 min versus 16.7 min). Total cost implication per procedure was also cheaper in Plastibell compared to freehand (₦3700 versus ₦6600). However, complications were more in the Plastibell group compared to freehand (29.1% versus 9.1%; P = 0.008). These complications in Plastibell group were age related. Parents in both groups were equally satisfied with the outlook on day 28.

Conclusion

Plastibell circumcision has the advantage of being faster and cheaper than freehand circumcision. Complications were more in the Plastibell group, and they were found to be age related.

Comparison of Rectal and Infrared Thermometry Temperatures in Anesthetized Swine (Sus scrofa)

Infrared thermometry (IRTM) is a noncontact method to measure temperature. The purpose of this study was to compare rectal temperature and IRTM in healthy anesthetized swine, with the hypothesis that IRTM would be an accurate, noninvasive alternative for rectal temperature measurement. Two groups of female Yorkshire-cross swine (n = 14 and n = 12) were sedated with Tiletamine-zolazepam (0.5 mg/kg) for blood collection during a routine physical examination. While sedated, rectal temperatures were measured using a SureTemp Plus 690 (Welch Allyn) and IRTM measurements were taken using a FLIR E5 thermal imaging camera. The 2 anatomic sites used for thermography measurements were the area surrounding the eye and the neck at the base of the ear. The distance from the imaging camera and the animal during IRTM measurements was 24 to 32 inches, a distance that would allow camera access in a standard swine enclosure. The infrared imaging camera's surface temperature measurement exhibited a proportional bias when compared with the rectal temperature. All rectal temperature measurements were between 98.7 °F to 101.3 °F, with a mean temperature of 100.4 °F. IRTM tended to underestimate rectal temperatures at lower values, and overestimate rectal temperatures at higher values by approximately (+) or (-) 0.8 °F of rectal temperature. Infrared thermometry can provide a quick noninvasive assessment of the body surface temperature, without the need for animal handling or restraint, but should not be considered an accurate replacement for rectal temperature measurement.