S - standard deviation CI - confidence interval.īland-Altman plots revealed a better agreement between auricular temperatures and rectal measurements using the glass-mercury thermometer for 3 min ( Table 2). A second experienced observer independently performed a second measurement of auricular temperature at the end of the 4 initial readings. A temperature controlled thermal plate was used to validate the auricular thermometer.įour temperatures were obtained by the same experienced observer in the following order: 1) rectal glass-mercury thermometer for 3 min, 2) auricular thermometer, 3) rectal digital thermometer, and 4) rectal glass-mercury thermometer until stabilization of the column (steady temperature). Prior to the study, accuracy of both rectal thermometers was validated in a temperature controlled water bath against a reference thermometer. The digital thermometer was also inserted a minimum of 2 cm into the rectum, where it remained until an endpoint reading audible beep was heard. The rectal glass-mercury thermometer was inserted a minimum of 2 cm into the rectum, and kept in contact with the rectal mucosa either until an apparently steady temperature was observed (stabilization of the mercury column) or for 3 min. After being positioned in the ear canal descending to the eardrum, the activation push-button was pressed and the auricular infrared thermometer provided readings within seconds. Each animal was acclimatized to the temperature in the room for 30 min before measurements were taken.Ĭommercially available thermometers were used, including an auricular infrared device (Thermoscan IRT 4520 Braun, Kronberg, Germany), a glass-mercury thermometer (Accumed G-Tech, São Paulo, Brazil), and a digital equilibrium thermometer (Digital Soft Tip CVS, Woonsocket, Rhode Island, USA). In this study, therefore, we hypothesized that a correlation exists between auricular and rectal temperatures in a large population of clinically healthy dogs.īody temperatures were obtained in a room that had a mean temperature of 26.2☌ ± 0.1☌ and relative air humidity of 67.0% ± 17.2%. In many studies, however, only a small number of animals was assessed ( 1, 4, 9). Studies have shown varying results when comparing auricular with rectal temperatures. These thermometers utilize pyroelectric sensors to detect the temperature of the tympanic membrane, which theoretically provides a more accurate measurement of core body temperature ( 7, 8). Recently there has been an increase in the use of non-contact non-invasive thermometers, such as the infrared auricular thermometer, presumably because of the shorter time needed to obtain body temperature, the supposed accuracy, and better patient compliance in dogs and cats ( 1, 4). Most often, dogs have their body temperature obtained by placing a mildly invasive contact thermometer, such as a glass thermometer or a digital thermometer, against the rectal mucosa for varying lengths of time ( 1, 3, 6). The latter are used more frequently in anesthetized and critical care patients. Several types of clinical thermometers are available, including non-contact non-invasive, mildly-invasive contact, and invasive contact devices. Moreover, many conditions, including digestion, peristaltic movements, fecal masses, muscle tone, and physical activity may affect temperatures acquired by rectal thermometry ( 5). Besides being stressful for many dogs, use of rectal thermometers is time-consuming and can be a potential source of cross-contamination and injury to the patient and the veterinarian ( 2– 4). Body temperature in dogs has traditionally been obtained by using rectal thermometers. Measuring body temperature allows the identification of variations of core temperature associated with medical conditions ( 1).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |