The comparison of temporal temperature measurement method by non-contact infrared thermometer with other body temperature measurement methods

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of non-contact infrared thermometer (NCIT) by comparing with other thermometers and/or body temperature measurement methods. Methods: The patients were divided into 3 groups: 0-1 year-old babies, >16 year-old female patients, and 1-16 year-old children. The body temperature of all patients was measured by NCIT at the temporal region, and the digital thermometer through the axillary region. Moreover, body temperature of the children was measured with tympanic thermometer and of adults with digital thermometer through oral route. Results: When compared to other temperature measurement methods, in all patients, the temporal temperature was not statistically different to that of rectal temperature (p>0.05); but it was 0.6°C higher than axillary (p<0.001), 0.3°C higher than oral (p<0.001), and 0.1°C higher than tympanic temperatures (p<0.001). If the rectal temperature of ≥38°C has been taken as a reference value for fever; the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values for average temporal temperature were 48.5, 99.5, 88.9, and 96.3%, respectively. Based on visual inspection of the Bland-Altman plots, NCIT underestimated the higher body temperatures which resulted in a low sensitivity. Conclusion: Our findings indicate that NCITs can be used as a rapid, hygienic and noninvasive method for excluding fever in children. However, this method has low sensitivity for detecting fever compared to that of rectal measurement and other noninvasive techniques. Although temporal temperature seems to be close to rectal temperature, this method is not ideal for detecting febrile patients yet.Keywords: Fever, body temperature measurement, non-contact infrared thermometer, children ÖZ Amaç: Temassız kızıl ötesi termometrenin (TKÖT) diğer termometreler ve/veya vücut sıcaklığı ölçüm yöntemleri ile karşılaştırılması suretiyle etkinliğinin değerlendirilmesi amaçlandı. Yöntem: Hastalar 0-1 yaş arasındaki bebekler, >16 yaş kadınlar ve 1-16 yaş arasındaki çocuklar olmak üzere 3 gruba ayrıldı. Tüm hastaların vücut sıcaklığı, TKÖT aracılığıyla sağ ve sol temporal bölgelerden ve dijital termometre ile aksiller bölgeden ölçülmüştür. Ayrıca vücut sıcaklıkları tüm çocuklarda timpanik termometreyle ve yetişkinlerde ise oral yoldan dijital termometre ile ölçülmüştür. Bulgular: Diğer sıcaklık ölçüm yöntemlerine kıyasla, tüm hastalarda temporal sıcaklık rektal sıcaklıktan farklı değildi (p>0,05); aksiller sıcaklıktan 0,6°C daha yüksek (p<0,001), oral sıcaklıktan 0.3°C daha yüksek (p<0,001) ve timpanik sıcaklıktan ise 0,1°C daha yüksekti (p<0,001). Eğer ateş için ≥38°C rektal sıcaklık bir referans değer olarak alınırsa, ortalama temporal sıcaklık için duyarlılık, özgüllük, pozitif ve negatif prediktif değerler sırasıyla %48,5, %99,5, %88,9 ve %96,3 idi. Bland-Altman alanlarının görsel incelemesine göre, TKÖT yüksek vücut sıcaklığında sıcaklığı olduğundan daha düşük tahmin etmekte ve bu nedenle düşük duyarlılık göstermektedir. Sonuç: Bulgularımız TKÖT'lerin çocuklarda ateşi dışlam...

Thermographic Control of Pediatric Dental Patients During the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemics Using Smartphones

“…In the early period of the pandemic, NCITs, already used in medicine, became the recommended devices for use in mass screens since they are fast, easy to use, cheap and do not require direct contact like the common electronic thermometers [8,11]. The use has been very simple and fast in our study too.…”

“…During the early spread of Coronavirus, forehead temperature measurement with NCITs became used widely than the measurement at the tympanic point. The tympanic temperature is closer than the forehead temperature to the body's core temperature and gives the most accurate measurements [8,9,11]. With the NCITs, the measurement at the tympanic level was not carried out in compliance with the anti-COVID 19 regulations to not expose the patients involved to any risk [4][5][6][8][9][10].…”

“…During the pandemic, the problem of maintaining a safe distance (according to the WHO, estimated to be around 1 meter) and the problem of disinfecting the instruments' surfaces used in this type of screening immediately arose to avoid the spread of contagion. For this reason, the use of infrared digital thermometers that work without direct contact on the skin (NCIT or non-contact infra-red thermometers) and other contactless devices such as infrared thermal imaging cameras (IR-TIC) and infrared thermal scanners have been recommended [8][9][10][11].…”

“…Both measurements with an infrared digital thermometer and with thermal imaging cameras or scanners, therefore, require a constant ambient temperature of around 18-21° C with a humidity level of no more than 50% and no less than 30%. These rules, in addition to an adequate acclimatization time of the subject at rest without jackets and clothing or accessories that cover the face (including the mask), lead to a realistic measurement of body temperature [11].…”

“…They are used as an optical reference source to obtain more accurate measurements providing a reference temperature in the field of view of the thermal imaging camera. The potential for drift or detection errors during measurements is further reduced and it allows a higher performance than the normal temperature measurement with a digital thermometer [11,13,14].…”