Use of noncontact infrared thermography to measure temperature in children in a triage room

Abstract

We compared the accuracy and utility of 3 infrared (IFR) thermographs fitted with axillary digital thermometers used to measure temperature in febrile and afebrile children admitted to an emergency triage room.A total of 184 febrile and 135 afebrile children presenting to a triage room were consecutively evaluated. Axillary temperature was recorded using a digital electronic thermometer. Simultaneously, IFR skin scans were performed on the forehead, the neck (over the carotid artery), and the nape by the same nurse. Fever was defined as an axillary temperature ≥37.5°C. The temperature readings at the 4 sites were compared.For all subjects, the median axillary temperature was 37.7 ± 1.5°C, the IFR forehead temperature was 37 ± 1.1°C, the IFR neck temperature was 37.6 ± 1.5°C, and the IFR nape temperature was 37 ± 1.2°C. A Bland–Altman plot of the differences suggested that all agreements between IFR and axillary measures were poor (the latter measure was considered the standard). The forehead measurements had a sensitivity of 88.6% and a specificity of 60% in patients with temperatures ≥36.75°C. The sensitivities of the neck measurement at cut-offs of ≥37.35°C and ≥36.95 were 95.5% and 78.8% for those aged 2 to 6 years. Thus, 11.4% of febrile subjects were missed when forehead measurements were performed.An IFR scan over the lateral side of neck is a reliable, comfortable, rapid, and noninvasive method for fever screening, particularly in children aged 2 to 6 years, in busy settings such as pediatric triage rooms.

The diagnostic accuracy of digital, infrared and mercury-in-glass thermometers in measuring body temperature: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

“…The selected studies were published between 1991 and 2019. We included 43 studies in quantitative analyses, three studies [ 25 , 27 , 37 ] did not provide data allowing the DTA analysis and NMA analysis. Six studies [ 24 , 41 , 45 , 47 , 55 , 66 ] reporting results on measurements were excluded from DTA analyses because the unit of analysis was patients, but was included in the NMA because the unit of analysis was means.…”

Comparative accuracy testing of non-contact infrared thermometers and temporal artery thermometers in an adult hospital setting

“…In children, a 0.2-0.4°C mean difference in body temperatures at or above 37.5°C was reported between the NCIT temperature when measured at forehead as compared to the core temperature measurements conducted using Temporal Artery Thermometers (TATs) 8 , 9 . Also in paediatric populations, studies have compared the NCITs with alternate devices including axillary digital thermometers 8 , 9 , 10 , tympanic artery thermometers 8 , 11 , 12 , and rectal thermometers 12 . Thus, in the current pandemic, this degree of error could result in inappropriate referrals for treatment, undetected infection transmissions across healthcare organisations and associated impacts on patient safety and clinical decision-making.…”

Clinical Efficiency of Non-Contact Infrared Thermometer over Axillary Digital Thermometer and Mercury in Glass Thermometer with Paracetamol

“…The study was conducted from 5 th December 2019 till 23 rd August 2020. Sample size was calculated taking reference to the study conducted by Berksoy et al, 6 as follows:…”