Rhoads F A, Grandner J
General Pediatric Ambulatory Center, Children's National Medical Center, Washington, DC.
Clin Pediatr (Phila). 1990 Feb;29(2):112-5. doi: 10.1177/000992289002900209.
A newly marketed device measures body temperature using an ear probe that detects infrared radiation from the tympanic membrane. It is simple to use and gives a reading in 1-2 seconds. Its accuracy was evaluated in a group of children, aged 1 month through 10 years, by comparing it with either rectal (n = 65), or oral (n = 48) temperatures obtained with a standard electronic thermometer, IVAC (San Diego, CA). The average elapsed time between readings was 11 minutes. Overall, 60 rectal and 40 oral temperatures (88.5%) were higher with IVAC than with the aural sensor. The difference ranged from -0.7 degrees C to +2.5 degrees C. The correlations between the infrared ear-probe values and the rectal and oral temperature readings were 0.77 and 0.75, respectively. Because the average reading using the aural sensor was lower than that using the IVAC, the sensitivity of the aural sensor for detecting clinically important levels of fever was low. None of seven patients with a rectal temperature of 39 degrees C or more and only 7 of 27 with a rectal temperature of 38 degrees C or more were identified by the aural sensor as having temperatures above these cutoff levels. Similarly, none of three patients with an oral temperature of 39 degrees C or more and only three of eight with an oral temperature of 38 degrees C or more were identified correctly by the aural sensor. The authors conclude that the aural sensor is unsatisfactory for detecting clinically significant fevers in a pediatric outpatient setting.
一种新上市的设备使用耳探头测量体温，该探头可检测来自鼓膜的红外辐射。它使用简便，1 - 2秒内即可给出读数。通过将其与使用标准电子温度计IVAC（加利福尼亚州圣地亚哥）测得的直肠温度（n = 65）或口腔温度（n = 48）进行比较，对一组年龄在1个月至10岁的儿童评估了其准确性。两次读数之间的平均间隔时间为11分钟。总体而言，使用IVAC测得的直肠温度中有60次、口腔温度中有40次（88.5%）高于使用耳温传感器测得的温度。差异范围在 - 0.7摄氏度至 +2.5摄氏度之间。红外耳探头值与直肠温度读数和口腔温度读数之间的相关性分别为0.77和0.75。由于使用耳温传感器的平均读数低于使用IVAC的读数，所以耳温传感器检测具有临床意义的发热水平的灵敏度较低。直肠温度达到或超过39摄氏度的7名患者中，耳温传感器均未将其识别为体温高于这些临界值；直肠温度达到或超过38摄氏度的27名患者中，耳温传感器仅识别出7名。同样，口腔温度达到或超过39摄氏度的3名患者中，耳温传感器均未正确识别；口腔温度达到或超过38摄氏度的8名患者中，耳温传感器仅正确识别出3名。作者得出结论，在儿科门诊环境中，耳温传感器用于检测具有临床意义的发热情况并不理想。
