AJCC
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

American Journal of Critical Care. 2003;12: 403-408
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Respond to This Article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Right arrow Take the CE Test
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Potter, P.
Right arrow Articles by McSweeney, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Potter, P.
Right arrow Articles by McSweeney, M.

CE Online and Journal Club Feature

Evaluation of Chemical Dot Thermometers for Measuring Body Temperature of Orally Intubated Patients

By Patricia Potter, RN, PhD, CMAC, Marilyn Schallom, RN, MSN, CCRN, CCNS, Susan Davis, RN, MSN, BC, CS-MSCNS, CCRN, Carrie Sona, RN, MSN, CCRN, CS-MSCNS and Maryellen McSweeney, PhD. From Barnes Jewish Hospital (PP, MS, SD, CS) and St Louis University (MM), St Louis, Mo.

• Background Recent research indicates that oral measurement of body temperature is a reliable option in orally intubated patients. In situations such as protective isolation, where dedicated electronic thermometers are not available, are single-use chemical dot thermometers an acceptable alternative?

• Objective To determine the accuracy of single-use chemical dot thermometers in orally intubated adult patients.

• Methods Subjects included a convenience sample of 85 adult patients admitted to 1 of 2 intensive care units (surgical trauma and neuroscience). For each patient, oral temperatures were measured concurrently (within 5 minutes) with a chemical dot thermometer and an electronic thermometer. The sequence of temperature measurements was alternated with each subsequent patient. Both thermometers were placed in the same posterior sublingual pocket opposite the side of the endotracheal tube.

• Results Measurements obtained with electronic and single-use chemical dot thermometers correlated strongly (r = 0.937). With the chemical dot thermometer, body temperature was overestimated in 11.8% of the measurements and underestimated in 10.8% of the measurements by 0.4°C or more. The difference between oral temperatures measured with the 2 different thermometers was not related to the patient’s age, sex, or sublingual pocket location or to the order of thermometer use.

• Conclusion The chemical dot thermometer is useful and reliable for measuring body temperature of orally intubated patients. When measurements of body temperature have important consequences for decisions about treatment, clinicians should use an electronic thermometer to confirm measurements made with a chemical dot thermometer.

 

Journal Club Article Discussion Points






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2003 by the American Association of Critical-Care Nurses.