Postma C T, Wahjudi J, Kamps J A, de Boo T, van der Meer J W
Afd. Algemeen Interne Geneeskunde, Academisch Ziekenhuis, Nijmegen.
Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 1997 May 10;141(19):942-6.
To examine whether, in clinical practice, the infrared tympanic thermometer shows temperature readings similar to those obtained with the rectal digital thermometer, so that the former can replace the latter.
Prospective comparative study.
Academic Hospital, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
In 104 patients admitted to the department of medicine, body temperature was measured by both methods within approximately ten minutes. This was done on two successive days. The measurements were then analysed by plotting the difference between two measurements against their mean. Then the limits of agreement, which are the mean of the differences between the two measurements plus and minus 2 standard deviations, were determined. With both thermometers also duplicate measurements were made to study the repeatability.
The mean difference between the 2 methods in the first measurement was 0.15 degree C (SD: 0.56), in the second measurement it was 0.07 degree C (0.52). The limits of agreement were 1.27 degrees C and -0.97 degree C for the first comparisons and 1.13 degrees C and -0.99 degree C for the second comparisons. In the duplicate measurements, the mean difference between the first and the second measurement was 0.02 degree C (0.19) in the rectal measurement, and 0.09 degree C (0.23) in the tympanic measurement. The patients found the tympanic measurements significantly less painful and unpleasant than the rectal measurement. The mean time needed for the tympanic measurements (8 s) was ten times less than for the rectal measurements (79 s).
The results of this study show good agreement between the infrared tympanic thermometer and the rectal digital thermometer so that they may be regarded as interchangeable. The patients had a clear preference for the tympanic thermometer, which also took less time.
探讨在临床实践中，红外鼓膜温度计所显示的温度读数是否与直肠指诊温度计所测得的读数相似，以便前者能够取代后者。
前瞻性对照研究。
荷兰奈梅亨的学术医院。
对104名内科住院患者，在大约10分钟内用两种方法测量体温。连续两天进行此操作。然后通过绘制两次测量值的差值与其平均值的关系图来分析测量结果。接着确定一致性界限，即两次测量值差值的平均值加减2个标准差。同时，使用两种温度计进行重复测量以研究重复性。
第一次测量中两种方法的平均差值为0.15摄氏度（标准差：0.56），第二次测量中为0.07摄氏度（0.52）。第一次比较时一致性界限为1.27摄氏度和-0.97摄氏度，第二次比较时为1.13摄氏度和-0.99摄氏度。在重复测量中，直肠测量第一次与第二次测量的平均差值为0.02摄氏度（0.19），鼓膜测量为0.09摄氏度（0.23）。患者发现鼓膜测量比直肠测量明显更不痛且更舒适。鼓膜测量所需的平均时间（8秒）比直肠测量（79秒）少十倍。
本研究结果表明红外鼓膜温度计与直肠指诊温度计之间具有良好的一致性，因此它们可被视为可互换的。患者明显更倾向于使用鼓膜温度计，而且使用该温度计所需时间也更少。
