Hooker E A, Smith S W, Miles T, King L
Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Louisville School of Medicine, Kentucky, USA.
Ann Emerg Med. 1996 Sep;28(3):313-7. doi: 10.1016/s0196-0644(96)70031-8.
To assess the ability of parents to subjectively evaluate their children for fever and to compare their assessments with temperature measurements made with the use of a noncontact tympanic (NCT) or rectal glass mercury thermometer. A secondary goal was to assess how well a recently developed definition of fever for NCT thermometers, when used in the ear-equivalent mode (temperature of 37.7 degrees C or more), performed in a clinical situation.
This 6-month prospective observational study employed a convenience sample of 180 children, aged birth to 4 years, who presented to the emergency department of a tertiary care children's hospital. Parents were asked to subjectively assess whether their child had a fever. The child's temperature was then measured with an NCT thermometer (three times in the rectal-equivalent mode and three times in the actual-ear mode). Both the subjective assessment and the NCT temperatures were compared with the rectal temperature measured by a rectal glass mercury thermometer.
The mean age of participants was 14.6 +/- 11.8 months (range, 2 days to 48 months); 56% were boys. The sensitivity of parental detection of fever by subjective means was 81.8% and the specificity 76.5%. The parent and the rectal glass thermometer agreed 79% of the time (95% confidence interval [CI], 73% to 85%). The sensitivity of the first temperature reading obtained with the NCT thermometer in rectal-equivalent mode was 74.7%, and the specificity was 96.3%. The NCT thermometer and the rectal glass thermometer agreed 84% of the time (95% CI, 78% to 89%). Use of the proposed definition of fever for NCT thermometers, when used in the ear-equivalent mode, caused sensitivity of a single measurement for fever to drop to 53.5%.
Parental subjective assessment of fever agreed with the presence of fever as measured by rectal glass thermometer in 79% of cases. Specificity was improved with the use of the NCT thermometer. The recently proposed definition for fever for NCT thermometers, when they are used in the ear-equivalent mode, does not appear to be validated by the current data.
评估父母主观评估孩子是否发烧的能力,并将他们的评估结果与使用非接触式鼓膜(NCT)温度计或直肠玻璃水银温度计测量的体温进行比较。第二个目标是评估最近制定的NCT温度计发烧定义在耳等效模式下(温度为37.7摄氏度或更高)在临床情况下的表现。
这项为期6个月的前瞻性观察性研究采用了便利抽样,选取了180名年龄在出生至4岁之间的儿童,这些儿童前往一家三级护理儿童医院的急诊科就诊。要求父母主观评估他们的孩子是否发烧。然后用NCT温度计测量孩子的体温(在直肠等效模式下测量三次,在实际耳部模式下测量三次)。将主观评估和NCT温度与直肠玻璃水银温度计测量的直肠温度进行比较。
参与者的平均年龄为14.6±11.8个月(范围为2天至48个月);56%为男孩。父母通过主观方式检测发烧的敏感性为81.8%,特异性为76.5%。父母和直肠玻璃温度计的结果在79%的情况下一致(95%置信区间[CI],73%至85%)。NCT温度计在直肠等效模式下获得的第一次体温读数的敏感性为74.7%,特异性为96.3%。NCT温度计和直肠玻璃温度计的结果在84%的情况下一致(95%CI,78%至89%)。当在耳等效模式下使用时,NCT温度计提议的发烧定义导致单次发烧测量的敏感性降至53.5%。
父母对发烧的主观评估与直肠玻璃温度计测量的发烧情况在79%的病例中一致。使用NCT温度计提高了特异性。当NCT温度计在耳等效模式下使用时,最近提议的发烧定义似乎未得到当前数据的验证。