Moran John L, Peter John Victor, Solomon Patricia J, Grealy Bernadette, Smith Tania, Ashforth Wendy, Wake Megan, Peake Sandra L, Peisach Aaron R
Department of Intensive Care Medicine, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Woodville, South Australia, Australia.
Crit Care Med. 2007 Jan;35(1):155-64. doi: 10.1097/01.CCM.0000250318.31453.CB.
Accurate measurement of temperature is vital in the intensive care setting. A prospective trial was performed to compare the accuracy of tympanic, urinary, and axillary temperatures with that of pulmonary artery (PA) core temperature measurements.
A total of 110 patients were enrolled in a prospective observational cohort study.
Multidisciplinary intensive care unit of a university teaching hospital.
The cohort was (mean +/- sd) 65 +/- 16 yrs of age, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score was 25 +/- 9, 58% of the patients were men, and 76% were mechanically ventilated. The accuracy of tympanic (averaged over both ears), axillary (averaged over both sides), and urinary temperatures was referenced (as mean difference, Delta degrees centigrade) to PA temperatures as standard in 6,703 recordings. Lin concordance correlation (pc) and Bland-Altman 95% limits of agreement (degrees centigrade) described the relationship between paired measurements. Regression analysis (linear mixed model) assessed covariate confounding with respect to temperature modes and reliability formulated as an intraclass correlation coefficient.
Concordance of PA temperatures with tympanic, urinary, and axillary was 0.77, 0.92, and 0.83, respectively. Compared with PA temperatures, Delta (limits of agreement) were 0.36 degrees C (-0.56 degrees C, 1.28 degrees C), -0.05 degrees C (-0.69 degrees C, 0.59 degrees C), and 0.30 degrees C (-0.42 degrees C, 1.01 degrees C) for tympanic, urinary, and axillary temperatures, respectively. Temperature measurement mode effect, estimated via regression analysis, was consistent with concordance and Delta (PA vs. urinary, p = .98). Patient age (p = .03), sedation score (p = .0001), and dialysis (p = .0001) had modest negative relations with temperature; quadratic relationships were identified with adrenaline and dobutamine. No interactions with particular temperature modes were identified (p > or = .12 for all comparisons) and no relationship was identified with either mean arterial pressure or APACHE II score (p > or = .64). The average temperature mode intraclass correlation coefficient for test-retest reliability was 0.72.
Agreement of tympanic with pulmonary temperature was inferior to that of urinary temperature, which, on overall assessment, seemed more likely to reflect PA core temperature.
在重症监护环境中,准确测量体温至关重要。进行了一项前瞻性试验,以比较鼓膜温度、尿液温度、腋温与肺动脉(PA)核心温度测量的准确性。
共110例患者纳入一项前瞻性观察队列研究。
一所大学教学医院的多学科重症监护病房。
队列患者平均年龄(均值±标准差)为65±16岁,急性生理与慢性健康状况评估(APACHE)II评分为25±9,58%为男性,76%接受机械通气。在6703次测量记录中,以PA温度为标准,将鼓膜温度(双耳平均值)、腋温(双侧平均值)和尿液温度的准确性作为平均差值(摄氏度差值,Δ)进行参考。用线性一致性相关系数(pc)和布兰德-奥特曼95%一致性界限(摄氏度)描述配对测量之间的关系。回归分析(线性混合模型)评估了温度测量模式的协变量混杂情况以及以组内相关系数表示的可靠性。
PA温度与鼓膜温度、尿液温度和腋温的一致性分别为0.77、0.92和0.83。与PA温度相比,鼓膜温度、尿液温度和腋温的Δ(一致性界限)分别为0.36℃(-0.56℃,1.28℃)、-0.05℃(-0.69℃,0.59℃)和0.30℃(-0.42℃,1.01℃)。通过回归分析估计的温度测量模式效应与一致性和Δ(PA与尿液温度比较,p = 0.98)一致。患者年龄(p = 0.03)、镇静评分(p = 0.0001)和透析(p = 0.0001)与体温呈适度负相关;与肾上腺素和多巴酚丁胺呈二次关系。未发现与特定温度测量模式有相互作用(所有比较p≥0.12),且未发现与平均动脉压或APACHE II评分有关(p≥0.64)。重测可靠性的平均温度测量模式组内相关系数为0.72。
鼓膜温度与肺动脉温度的一致性低于尿液温度,总体评估显示尿液温度似乎更有可能反映PA核心温度。