Measurement of non-invasive rectal and ear temperature in inpatients ≥ 18 years old: A cross-sectional comparative study.

Lone Jørgensen, Birgitte Boll, Kristina Fischer Rosenkilde, Niels Henrik Bruun, Preben Ulrich Pedersen, Marianne Wetendorff Nørgaard
{"title":"Measurement of non-invasive rectal and ear temperature in inpatients ≥ 18 years old: A cross-sectional comparative study.","authors":"Lone Jørgensen, Birgitte Boll, Kristina Fischer Rosenkilde, Niels Henrik Bruun, Preben Ulrich Pedersen, Marianne Wetendorff Nørgaard","doi":"10.1016/j.zefq.2024.11.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Body temperature measurement is a fundamental requirement for clinical decisions in nursing care, medical diagnosis, and treatment. Therefore, it is pivotal that body temperature measurements are accurate and precise.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>To test the diagnostic accuracy of an ear temperature screening procedure among adult hospitalized patients. Further aims were to test the precision of the measurements being carried out by trained registered nurses compared with daily routine practice and to investigate patients' preferences for different measurement methods.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In Aalborg University Hospital, 274 patients were included in a cross-sectional comparative study. Each patient had four temperature measurements and responded to a survey regarding their preference for measurement. Bland-Altman analysis was used to evaluate the difference between ear- and rectal measurements. Sensitivity and specificity were evaluated at different cut-off points.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The ear temperature was 0.1 to 0.2 °C lower than rectal temperature. At a cut-off point at 37.5 °C an ear thermometer is accurate and can be used for screening, while higher cut-off points risk missing patients with fever. There was no significant difference in the mean temperature measured by a trained registered nurse or other staff members and patients. Patients preferred ear measurements to rectal measurements.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The tested ear thermometer is accurate for screening fever in an adult population during hospital admission. Using ear measurement as a screening tool can contribute to a less resource-demanding care activity and a more convenient alternative to rectal measurements in hospitalised patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":46628,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift fur Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualitaet im Gesundheitswesen","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Zeitschrift fur Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualitaet im Gesundheitswesen","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.zefq.2024.11.005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Body temperature measurement is a fundamental requirement for clinical decisions in nursing care, medical diagnosis, and treatment. Therefore, it is pivotal that body temperature measurements are accurate and precise.

Aims: To test the diagnostic accuracy of an ear temperature screening procedure among adult hospitalized patients. Further aims were to test the precision of the measurements being carried out by trained registered nurses compared with daily routine practice and to investigate patients' preferences for different measurement methods.

Methods: In Aalborg University Hospital, 274 patients were included in a cross-sectional comparative study. Each patient had four temperature measurements and responded to a survey regarding their preference for measurement. Bland-Altman analysis was used to evaluate the difference between ear- and rectal measurements. Sensitivity and specificity were evaluated at different cut-off points.

Results: The ear temperature was 0.1 to 0.2 °C lower than rectal temperature. At a cut-off point at 37.5 °C an ear thermometer is accurate and can be used for screening, while higher cut-off points risk missing patients with fever. There was no significant difference in the mean temperature measured by a trained registered nurse or other staff members and patients. Patients preferred ear measurements to rectal measurements.

Conclusion: The tested ear thermometer is accurate for screening fever in an adult population during hospital admission. Using ear measurement as a screening tool can contribute to a less resource-demanding care activity and a more convenient alternative to rectal measurements in hospitalised patients.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
测量≥18 岁住院患者的无创直肠和耳温:横断面比较研究。
引言体温测量是临床护理、医疗诊断和治疗决策的基本要求。目的:测试成年住院病人耳温筛查程序的诊断准确性。进一步的目的是测试由训练有素的注册护士进行测量的精确度与日常惯例的比较,并调查病人对不同测量方法的偏好:方法:奥尔堡大学医院对 274 名患者进行了横断面比较研究。每位患者都进行了四次体温测量,并对测量方法的偏好进行了调查。采用Bland-Altman分析法评估耳温测量和直肠测量之间的差异。对不同截断点的敏感性和特异性进行了评估:结果:耳温比直肠温度低 0.1 至 0.2 °C。耳温计的截断点为 37.5 °C,准确度高,可用于筛查,而截断点越高,则有可能漏掉发烧患者。训练有素的注册护士或其他工作人员测量的平均体温与患者测量的平均体温没有明显差异。与直肠测量相比,患者更喜欢耳温测量:结论:经测试的耳温计可准确筛查入院成人发热。将耳温测量作为一种筛查工具,有助于减少住院病人护理活动的资源需求,也是一种比直肠测量更方便的替代方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
18.20%
发文量
129
期刊最新文献
Digital health technologies enabling the transition from pregnancy to early parenthood: A scoping review. "We are doing it together, don't worry" - A qualitative study on the implementation of electronic medical records in German hospitals. [The potential of telemedicine applications to achieve universal health service coverage using the example of teledermatology]. [Dermatological diagnostics in patients with "skin of color"- How confident are German dermatologists?] [Integration of physician assistants into primary care: Acceptance and concerns among general practitioners].
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1