The diagnostic accuracy of digital, infrared and mercury-in-glass thermometers in measuring body temperature: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Author:

Pecoraro Valentina,Petri Davide,Costantino Giorgio,Squizzato Alessandro,Moja Lorenzo,Virgili Gianni,Lucenteforte ErsiliaORCID

Abstract

AbstractNot much is known about how accurate and reproducible different thermometers are at diagnosing patients with suspected fever. The study aims at evaluating which peripheral thermometers are more accurate and reproducible. We searched Medline, Embase, Scopus, WOS, CENTRAL, and Cinahl to perform: (1) diagnostic accuracy meta-analysis (MA) using rectal mercury-in-glass or digital thermometry as reference, and bivariate models for pooling; (2) network MA to estimate differences in mean temperature between devices; (3) Bland–Altman method to estimate 95% coefficient of reproducibility. PROSPERO registration: CRD42020174996. We included 46 studies enrolling more than 12,000 patients. Using 38 °C (100.4 ℉) as cut-off temperature, temporal infrared thermometry had a sensitivity of 0.76 (95% confidence interval, 0.65, 0.84; low certainty) and specificity of 0.96 (0.92, 0.98; moderate certainty); tympanic infrared thermometry had a sensitivity of 0.77 (0.60,  0.88; low certainty) and specificity of 0.98 (0.95, 0.99; moderate certainty). For all the other index devices, it was not possible to pool the estimates. Compared to the rectal mercury-in-glass thermometer, mean temperature differences were not statistically different from zero for temporal or tympanic infrared thermometry; the median coefficient of reproducibility ranged between 0.53 °C [0.95 ℉] for infrared temporal and 1.2 °C [2.16 ℉] for axillary digital thermometry. Several peripheral thermometers proved specific, but not sensitive for diagnosing fever with rectal thermometry as a reference standard, meaning that finding a temperature below 38 °C does not rule out fever. Fixed differences between temperatures together with random error means facing differences between measurements in the order of 2 °C [4.5 ℉]. This study informs practitioners of the limitations associated with different thermometers; peripheral ones are specific but not sensitive.

Funder

Fondazione Cassa si Risparmio di Firenze

Università di Pisa

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Emergency Medicine,Internal Medicine

Reference70 articles.

1. Kluger MJ (2015) Fever. Its biology, evolution, and function. Princeton University Press

2. Niven DJ, Gaudet JE, Laupland KB, Mrklas KJ, Roberts DJ, Stelfox HT (2015) Accuracy of peripheral thermometers for estimating temperature: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med 163(10):768–777

3. Symptoms of coronavirus. Centers of disease control and prevention. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/symptoms-testing/symptoms.html

4. (2020) Enforcement policy for clinical electronic thermometers during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID19) Public health emergency. Guidance for industry and food and drug administration staff. https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/enforcement-policy-clinical-electronic-thermometers-during-coronavirus-disease-2019-covid-19-public

5. (2013) National Institute for Care and Health Excellence. Feverish illness in children: Assessment and initial management in children younger than 5 years. NICE Guidelines (CG160). https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/CG160

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3