{"title":"中性粒细胞减少症患者直肠测温的风险。","authors":"Judith Olchowski, Noa Zimhony-Nissim, Lior Nesher, Leonid Barski, Elli Rosenberg, Iftach Sagy","doi":"10.5041/RMMJ.10501","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Avoiding rectal thermometry is recommended in patients with neutropenic fever. Permeability of the anal mucosa may result in a higher risk of bacteremia in these patients. Still, this recommendation is based on only a few studies.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study included all individuals admitted to our emergency department during 2014-2017 with afebrile (body temperature <38.3°C) neutropenia (neutrophil count <500 cells/microL) who were over the age of 18. Patients were stratified by the presence or absence of a rectal temperature measurement. The primary outcome was bacteremia during the first five days of index hospitalization; the secondary outcome was in-hospital mortality.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study included 40 patients with rectal temperature measurements and 407 patients whose temperatures were only measured orally. Among patients with oral temperature measurements, 10.6% had bacteremia, compared to 5.1% among patients who had rectal temperature measurements. Rectal temperature measurement was not associated with bacteremia, neither in non-matched (odds ratio [OR] 0.36, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.07-1.77) nor in matched cohort analyses (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.04-3.29). In-hospital mortality was also similar between the groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Patients with neutropenia who had their temperature taken using a rectal thermometer did not experience a higher frequency of events of documented bacteremia or increased in-hospital mortality.</p>","PeriodicalId":46408,"journal":{"name":"Rambam Maimonides Medical Journal","volume":"14 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10393468/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Risk of Rectal Temperature Measurement in Neutropenia.\",\"authors\":\"Judith Olchowski, Noa Zimhony-Nissim, Lior Nesher, Leonid Barski, Elli Rosenberg, Iftach Sagy\",\"doi\":\"10.5041/RMMJ.10501\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Avoiding rectal thermometry is recommended in patients with neutropenic fever. Permeability of the anal mucosa may result in a higher risk of bacteremia in these patients. Still, this recommendation is based on only a few studies.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study included all individuals admitted to our emergency department during 2014-2017 with afebrile (body temperature <38.3°C) neutropenia (neutrophil count <500 cells/microL) who were over the age of 18. Patients were stratified by the presence or absence of a rectal temperature measurement. The primary outcome was bacteremia during the first five days of index hospitalization; the secondary outcome was in-hospital mortality.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study included 40 patients with rectal temperature measurements and 407 patients whose temperatures were only measured orally. Among patients with oral temperature measurements, 10.6% had bacteremia, compared to 5.1% among patients who had rectal temperature measurements. Rectal temperature measurement was not associated with bacteremia, neither in non-matched (odds ratio [OR] 0.36, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.07-1.77) nor in matched cohort analyses (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.04-3.29). In-hospital mortality was also similar between the groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Patients with neutropenia who had their temperature taken using a rectal thermometer did not experience a higher frequency of events of documented bacteremia or increased in-hospital mortality.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46408,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Rambam Maimonides Medical Journal\",\"volume\":\"14 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10393468/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Rambam Maimonides Medical Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5041/RMMJ.10501\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rambam Maimonides Medical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5041/RMMJ.10501","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:中性粒细胞减少热患者建议避免直肠测温。肛门粘膜的渗透性可能导致这些患者发生菌血症的风险更高。不过,这一建议仅基于少数研究。方法:本回顾性研究纳入2014-2017年急诊收治的所有体温发热患者。结果:该研究包括40例测量直肠温度的患者和407例仅测量口腔温度的患者。在口腔测温的患者中,10.6%的患者有菌血症,而在直肠测温的患者中,这一比例为5.1%。直肠温度测量与菌血症无关,在非匹配队列分析中(优势比[OR] 0.36, 95%可信区间[CI] 0.07-1.77)和匹配队列分析中(OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.04-3.29)都是如此。两组之间的住院死亡率也相似。结论:使用直肠体温计测量体温的中性粒细胞减少症患者没有更高的记录菌血症事件频率或更高的住院死亡率。
The Risk of Rectal Temperature Measurement in Neutropenia.
Background: Avoiding rectal thermometry is recommended in patients with neutropenic fever. Permeability of the anal mucosa may result in a higher risk of bacteremia in these patients. Still, this recommendation is based on only a few studies.
Methods: This retrospective study included all individuals admitted to our emergency department during 2014-2017 with afebrile (body temperature <38.3°C) neutropenia (neutrophil count <500 cells/microL) who were over the age of 18. Patients were stratified by the presence or absence of a rectal temperature measurement. The primary outcome was bacteremia during the first five days of index hospitalization; the secondary outcome was in-hospital mortality.
Results: The study included 40 patients with rectal temperature measurements and 407 patients whose temperatures were only measured orally. Among patients with oral temperature measurements, 10.6% had bacteremia, compared to 5.1% among patients who had rectal temperature measurements. Rectal temperature measurement was not associated with bacteremia, neither in non-matched (odds ratio [OR] 0.36, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.07-1.77) nor in matched cohort analyses (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.04-3.29). In-hospital mortality was also similar between the groups.
Conclusions: Patients with neutropenia who had their temperature taken using a rectal thermometer did not experience a higher frequency of events of documented bacteremia or increased in-hospital mortality.