Kaore Shilpa, Najmi Ahmad, Balakrishnan S, Khan Mohammad Faizan, Kumar Prabhash, Gupta Aviraj
Additional Professor, Department of Pharmacology, AIIMS Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, India.
Associate Professor, Department of Pharmacology, AIIMS Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, India.
J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2024 Jul;16(Suppl 3):S1991-S1994. doi: 10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_73_24. Epub 2024 Jul 1.
Body temperature is a crucial indicator in assessing human physiological activity and health, particularly in pediatric and critically ill patients. This study aimed to compare temperature recordings obtained from digital calibrated thermometers with calibrated infrared thermometers and non-calibrated infrared thermometers against calibrated ones. An observational prospective study was conducted at AIIMS Bhopal, involving volunteers and febrile patients who consented to participate. Approval was obtained from the Institutional Human Ethics Committee, and 200 participants meeting inclusion/exclusion criteria were included. Data were collected and analyzed using Microsoft Excel. Mean and variance values were computed for both volunteer and febrile patient groups. The values in both groups were less than 0.05, indicating a significant difference between non-calibrated handheld infrared thermometers (T1), calibrated digital thermometers (T2), and their individual comparison with calibrated infrared thermometers (T3). Variance was higher in non-calibrated infrared thermometers (T1) compared to calibrated ones (T2) in both healthy volunteers and febrile patients. Pearson's correlation coefficient analysis within the febrile patient group demonstrated a robust positive correlation among all three thermometers compared to the healthy volunteers group. The study highlights variations in temperature readings when using different thermometers, irrespective of whether the assessment is conducted on healthy volunteers or febrile patients. Notably, the strength of association is lower in healthy volunteers than in febrile patients, suggesting that the interchangeability of thermometers may be more reliable and sufficient when assessing individuals with fever. These findings underscore the importance of careful consideration and validation of thermometer choices, especially in clinical settings where accurate temperature measurement is critical.
体温是评估人体生理活动和健康状况的关键指标，在儿科和重症患者中尤为重要。本研究旨在比较数字校准温度计、校准红外温度计和未校准红外温度计与校准温度计所测得的温度记录。在博帕尔全印医学科学研究所进行了一项观察性前瞻性研究，纳入了同意参与的志愿者和发热患者。获得了机构人类伦理委员会的批准，纳入了200名符合纳入/排除标准的参与者。使用微软Excel收集和分析数据。计算了志愿者组和发热患者组的均值和方差值。两组中的 值均小于0.05，表明未校准的手持式红外温度计（T1）、校准数字温度计（T2）以及它们与校准红外温度计（T3）的单独比较之间存在显著差异。在健康志愿者和发热患者中，未校准红外温度计（T1）的方差均高于校准红外温度计（T2）。与健康志愿者组相比，发热患者组内的皮尔逊相关系数分析表明，所有三种温度计之间存在强正相关。该研究强调了使用不同温度计时温度读数的差异，无论评估对象是健康志愿者还是发热患者。值得注意的是，健康志愿者中的关联强度低于发热患者，这表明在评估发热个体时，温度计的互换性可能更可靠且足够。这些发现强调了仔细考虑和验证温度计选择的重要性，尤其是在准确测量体温至关重要的临床环境中。
