Rohrberg M, Fritz U, Weyland W, Braun U
Zentrum Anästhesiologie, Rettungs- und Intensivmedizin, Georg-August-Universität Göttingen.
Anasthesiol Intensivmed Notfallmed Schmerzther. 1997 Jul;32(7):409-13. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-995081.
We compared the readings of the GENIUS 3000A FirstTemp infrared thermometer with a conventional temperature probe (MON-A-THERM tympanic) placed in contact with the tympanic membrane. We also systematically evaluated user-dependent factors influencing the infrared readings.
In 100 postoperative patients we investigated the repeatability of the infrared measurements and the agreement with tympanic thermocouple probes in the contralateral ear regarding the degree of auditory canal contamination. In 20 volunteers we evaluated the influence of three factors: interval between consecutive measurements, dwell time in the auditory canal before reading the temperature, and positioning of the grip. Finally, we compared the infrared readings in the same ear of 20 different users who were not familiar with this new method.
Comparison with the tympanic contact probes revealed a mean difference of -0.67 degree C (+/-0.65 degree C 2 SD). The infrared thermometer significantly underestimated the temperature of the thermocouple probes. Repeatability was +/-0.3 degree C. The presence of cerumen in the auditory canal had no influence on the infrared readings. Shortening of the interval between two consecutive readings (30 and 60 s.) led to increasing differences between the two measurements with the second reading decreasing. After positioning the infrared thermometer in the auditory canal 5 seconds before taking temperatures, the recorded temperatures were significantly lower compared to the immediate temperature recordings. Rotation of the device out of the telephone handle position led to an increasing lack of agreement between infrared thermometry and thermistor probes. In 20 inexperienced operators agreement with the thermocouple probe was -0.80 degree C (+/-0.60 degree C 2 SD) and repeatability was +/-0.6 degree C.
Although easy to use, infrared thermometry requires careful handling and experienced users. To get optimal recordings, the time between consecutive measurements should not be less than 90 seconds. Recordings should be taken immediately after positioning the device in the auditory canal. Best results are obtained when the grip of the device follows the ramus mandibulae like a telephone handle. The lower readings of the infrared thermometer compared to tympanic contact-probes indicate that the obtained readings represent the temperature of the auditory canal rather than of the tympanic membrane itself.
我们将GENIUS 3000A FirstTemp红外体温计的读数与置于鼓膜处的传统体温探头（MON - A - THERM鼓膜体温计）的读数进行了比较。我们还系统评估了影响红外读数的用户相关因素。
在100例术后患者中，我们研究了红外测量的可重复性以及与对侧耳鼓膜热电偶探头在耳道污染程度方面的一致性。在20名志愿者中，我们评估了三个因素的影响：连续测量之间的间隔时间、读取温度前在耳道内的停留时间以及握持部位的位置。最后，我们比较了20名不熟悉这种新方法的不同用户在同一耳的红外读数。
与鼓膜接触探头的比较显示平均差异为 -0.67℃（±0.65℃ 2标准差）。红外体温计显著低估了热电偶探头的温度。可重复性为±0.3℃。耳道内耵聍的存在对红外读数没有影响。连续两次读数之间的间隔时间缩短（30秒和60秒）导致两次测量之间的差异增大，第二次读数降低。在测量温度前5秒将红外体温计置于耳道内后，记录的温度与立即记录的温度相比显著更低。将设备从电话手柄位置旋转出来会导致红外测温法与热敏电阻探头之间的一致性越来越差。在20名无经验的操作人员中，与热电偶探头的一致性为 -0.80℃（±0.60℃ 2标准差），可重复性为±0.6℃。
尽管红外测温法易于使用，但需要小心操作且用户要有经验。为获得最佳记录，连续测量之间的时间间隔不应少于90秒。应在将设备置于耳道内后立即进行记录。当设备的握持部位像电话手柄一样顺着下颌骨升支时可获得最佳结果。与鼓膜接触探头相比，红外体温计读数较低表明所获得的读数代表的是耳道温度而非鼓膜本身的温度。
