Hanström Yrla, Oltegen Sara, Eklund Ida, Gröndahl Ellen, Liszke Ida, Söder Josefin
Department of Clinical Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, P.O. Box 7054, 75007 Uppsala, Sweden.
Vet Sci. 2025 Apr 1;12(4):321. doi: 10.3390/vetsci12040321.
Previous studies using tympanic thermometers on pets have presented inconsistent conclusions. The first aim of the current study was to compare the assessed temperatures using tympanic and rectal thermometers on healthy cats in a home environment and in cats admitted to clinical care. The second aim was to compare assessed stress (Fear, Anxiety and Stress scale, FAS) in healthy cats during the tympanic and rectal measurements. The non-clinical sample included 25 cats, and the clinical sample included 36 cats. The FAS score (mean ± SD) in the non-clinical sample was significantly higher ( < 0.0001) during the rectal measurements (2.9 ± 0.9) than during the in-ear measurements (1.6 ± 0.9), and the temperature (mean ± SD) in both the right and left ears was higher (mean bias 0.3 ± 0.8 °C, 95% limit of agreement [-1.3, 1.8]) than the rectal temperature. The cats in the clinical sample were categorized as either hypothermic (<36.7 °C, n = 5), normothermic (36.7-38.9 °C, n = 34), or hyperthermic (>38.9 °C, n = 8) according to their rectal temperature. In the hypothermic and normothermic cats, the left ear temperature was higher (mean bias 0.4 ± 0.4 °C, [-0.4, 1.2]) than the rectal temperature. In the hyperthermic cats, the left ear temperature was slightly higher (mean bias 0.1 ± 0.3 °C, [-0.4, 0.6]) than the rectal temperature. The results indicate that the currently used tympanic thermometer can be a non-stressful tool to screen for pyrexia in cats in clinical care. However, there is a risk of normothermic cats being falsely diagnosed with pyrexia. This method is not recommended in a home environment owing to the wider limits of agreements and lower precision in the non-clinical sample, complicating the interpretation of the assessed temperatures. In the current study, there were few hypothermic (n = 5) and hyperthermic cats (n = 8), as well as cats with temperatures above 40.0 °C (n = 2); thus, further studies are needed to fully establish this method's accuracy for these patient groups.
以往在宠物身上使用鼓膜温度计的研究得出了不一致的结论。本研究的首要目的是比较在家庭环境中的健康猫以及接受临床护理的猫身上,使用鼓膜温度计和直肠温度计所测得的体温。第二个目的是比较在对健康猫进行鼓膜测量和直肠测量期间所评估的应激情况(恐惧、焦虑和应激量表,FAS)。非临床样本包括25只猫,临床样本包括36只猫。在非临床样本中,直肠测量期间的FAS评分(均值±标准差)(2.9±0.9)显著高于耳内测量期间(1.6±0.9)(<0.0001),并且左右耳的温度(均值±标准差)均高于直肠温度(平均偏差0.3±0.8℃,95%一致性界限[-1.3, 1.8])。根据直肠温度,临床样本中的猫被分类为体温过低(<36.7℃,n = 5)、体温正常(36.7 - 38.9℃,n = 34)或体温过高(>38.9℃,n = 8)。在体温过低和体温正常的猫中,左耳温度高于直肠温度(平均偏差0.4±0.4℃,[-0.4, 1.2])。在体温过高的猫中,左耳温度略高于直肠温度(平均偏差0.1±0.3℃,[-0.4, 0.6])。结果表明,目前使用的鼓膜温度计可能是一种在临床护理中用于筛查猫发热且无应激的工具。然而,存在体温正常的猫被误诊为发热的风险。由于在非临床样本中一致性界限更宽且精度较低,使得所评估温度的解释变得复杂,因此在家庭环境中不推荐使用这种方法。在本研究中,体温过低的猫(n = 5)和体温过高的猫(n = 8)以及体温高于40.0℃的猫(n = 2)数量较少;因此,需要进一步研究以全面确定该方法对这些患者群体的准确性。