Morrissey Margaret C, Scarneo-Miller Samantha E, Giersch Gabrielle E W, Jardine John F, Casa Douglas J
Korey Stringer Institute, Department of Kinesiology, University of Connecticut, Storrs.
West Virginia University, Morgantown.
J Athl Train. 2021 Feb 1;56(2):197-202. doi: 10.4085/1062-6050-0449.19.
The use of aural thermometry as a method for accurately measuring internal temperature has been questioned. No researchers have examined whether aural thermometry can accurately measure internal body temperature in patients with exertional heat stroke (EHS).
To examine the effectiveness of aural thermometry as an alternative to the criterion standard of rectal thermometry in patients with and those without EHS.
Cross-sectional study.
An 11.3-km road race.
A total of 49 patients with EHS (15 men [age = 38 ± 17 years], 11 women [age = 28 ± 10 years]) and 23 individuals without EHS (10 men [age = 62 ± 17 years], 13 women [age = 45 ± 14 years]) who were triaged to the finish-line medical tent for suspected EHS.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Rectal and aural temperatures were obtained on arrival at the medical tent for patients with and those without EHS and at 8.3 ± 5.2 minutes into EHS treatment (cold-water immersion) for patients with EHS.
The mean difference between temperatures measured using rectal and aural thermometers in patients with EHS at medical tent admission was 2.4°C ± 0.96°C (4.3°F ± 1.7°F; mean rectal temperature = 41.1°C ± 0.8°C [106.1°F ± 1.4°F]; mean aural temperature = 38.8°C ± 1.1°C [101.8°F ± 2.0°F]). Rectal and aural temperatures during cold-water immersion in patients with EHS were 40.4°C ± 1.0°C (104.6°F ± 1.8°F) and 38.0°C ± 1.2°C (100.3°F ± 2.2°F), respectively. Rectal and aural temperatures for patients without EHS at medical tent admission were 38.8°C ± 0.87°C (101.9°F ± 1.6°F) and 37.2°C ± 1.0°C (99.1°F ± 1.8°F), respectively.
Aural thermometry is not an accurate method of diagnosing EHS and should not be used as an alternative to rectal thermometry. Using aural thermometry to diagnosis EHS can result in catastrophic outcomes, such as long-term sequelae or fatality.
耳温测量作为一种准确测量体内温度的方法受到了质疑。尚无研究人员探讨耳温测量能否准确测量劳力性热射病（EHS）患者的体内体温。
研究耳温测量作为直肠温度测量这一标准方法的替代方法，用于EHS患者和非EHS患者的有效性。
横断面研究。
一场11.3公里的公路赛。
共有49例EHS患者（15名男性[年龄=38±17岁]，11名女性[年龄=28±10岁]）和23名非EHS个体（10名男性[年龄=62±17岁]，13名女性[年龄=45±14岁]），他们因疑似EHS被分诊到终点线医疗帐篷。
在医疗帐篷中，对EHS患者和非EHS患者到达时以及EHS患者进行冷水浸泡治疗8.3±5.2分钟时，测量直肠温度和耳温。
在医疗帐篷入院时，EHS患者使用直肠温度计和耳温计测量的温度平均差值为2.4°C±0.96°C（4.3°F±1.7°F；平均直肠温度=41.1°C±0.8°C[106.1°F±1.4°F]；平均耳温=38.8°C±1.1°C[101.8°F±2.0°F]）。EHS患者冷水浸泡期间的直肠温度和耳温分别为40.4°C±1.0°C（104.6°F±1.8°F）和38.0°C±1.2°C（100.3°F±2.2°F）。非EHS患者在医疗帐篷入院时的直肠温度和耳温分别为38.8°C±0.87°C（101.9°F±1.6°F）和37.2°C±1.0°C（99.1°F±1.8°F）。
耳温测量不是诊断EHS的准确方法，不应作为直肠温度测量的替代方法。使用耳温测量诊断EHS可能会导致灾难性后果，如长期后遗症或死亡。
