Woodrow P, May V, Buras-Rees S, Higgs D, Hendrick J, Lewis T, Whitney S, Cummings C, Boorman P, O'Donnell A, Harris P, McHenry M
East Kent Hospitals NHS Trust, Canterbury.
Br J Nurs. 2006;15(18):1012-6. doi: 10.12968/bjon.2006.15.18.22028.
Temperature is a vital sign which can be measured using various types of clinical thermometers. Pulmonary artery temperature is considered the 'gold standard', but this measurement is not usually clinically practical. There is currently no consensus for optimal alternative site or equipment. This research compares 178 simultaneous measurements from 5 clinical areas, using two types of thermometers: tympanic and no-touch temporal. No-touch thermometers were all set to oral equivalent. Tympanic thermometers were adjusted to either oral (n=105) or core (n=73) equivalent. Maximum acceptable difference was identified as 1oC. Two data sets (oral/core; oral/oral) were analysed using Bland-Altman method on Excel programmes, comparing all thermometers and separating oral and core-equivalent tympanics. The two thermometers were found not to be equivalent. As a simple comparison between two thermometers, this research cannot identify which thermometer is more accurate.
体温是一项重要体征，可使用多种类型的临床体温计进行测量。肺动脉温度被视为“金标准”，但这种测量方法在临床上通常不实用。目前对于最佳替代测量部位或设备尚无共识。本研究使用两种体温计（鼓膜体温计和非接触式颞部体温计），比较了来自5个临床区域的178组同步测量数据。非接触式体温计均设置为口腔等效温度。鼓膜体温计分别调整为口腔等效温度（n = 105）或核心体温等效温度（n = 73）。最大可接受差异确定为1摄氏度。使用Excel程序上的布兰德-奥特曼方法分析了两组数据集（口腔/核心；口腔/口腔），比较了所有体温计，并将口腔等效鼓膜体温计和核心体温等效鼓膜体温计分开分析。结果发现这两种体温计并不等效。作为两种体温计之间的简单比较，本研究无法确定哪种体温计更准确。
