王丽. 三种测量体温方式在急诊病人预检分诊中准确性的比较[J]. 蚌埠医学院学报, 2021, 46(9): 1309-1311. DOI: 10.13898/j.cnki.issn.1000-2200.2021.09.041
    引用本文: 王丽. 三种测量体温方式在急诊病人预检分诊中准确性的比较[J]. 蚌埠医学院学报, 2021, 46(9): 1309-1311. DOI: 10.13898/j.cnki.issn.1000-2200.2021.09.041
    WANG Li. Comparison of the accuracy of three temperature measurement methods in emergency patients' pre-examination and triage[J]. Journal of Bengbu Medical College, 2021, 46(9): 1309-1311. DOI: 10.13898/j.cnki.issn.1000-2200.2021.09.041
    Citation: WANG Li. Comparison of the accuracy of three temperature measurement methods in emergency patients' pre-examination and triage[J]. Journal of Bengbu Medical College, 2021, 46(9): 1309-1311. DOI: 10.13898/j.cnki.issn.1000-2200.2021.09.041

    三种测量体温方式在急诊病人预检分诊中准确性的比较

    Comparison of the accuracy of three temperature measurement methods in emergency patients' pre-examination and triage

    • 摘要:
      目的分析生命体征测量仪、红外耳温仪、红外额式体温仪3种测温方式在急诊病人预检分诊中的准确性和差异。
      方法选择某三级甲等医院急诊科就诊病人175例,采用自身对照法,每例急诊病人均分别采用生命体征监测仪、红外耳温仪和额温仪3种方式进行测温并记录,比较3种方法的准确性和差异度。
      结果3种测温方式结果间差异有统计学意义(P < 0.01),其中红外耳温仪和红外额式体温仪测得温度均明显低于生命体征检测仪(P < 0.01)。在正常体温(36~37.2℃)病人中,3种体温测量方式结果差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05),其中红外耳温仪和生命体征检测仪测得温度均高于红外额式体温仪(P < 0.05)。
      结论急诊病人进行体温测量时,额温仪只宜作为初步筛查,耳温仪与生命体征测量仪相对准确性好,差异性小,适于急诊病人临床使用。

       

      Abstract:
      ObjectiveTo analyze the temperature measurement accuracy and differences of the vital-sign thermometer, red external ear thermometer and infrared frontal body thermometer in the pre-examination and triage of emergency patients.
      MethodsA total of 175 patients were selected from the emergency department of a grade A tertiary hospital.The temperature of each patient was measured and recorded using the vital signs monitor, red external ear thermometer and frontal thermometer, respectively, and the accuracy and differences of three methods were compared.
      ResultsThe results of the temperature measurement among three methods were statistically significant (P < 0.01), and the temperature measured by red outer ear thermometer and infrared frontal body thermometer was significantly lower than that measured by vital signs detector (P < 0.01). Among the patients with normal body temperature (36-37.2℃), the differences of the temperature measured by three methods were statistically significant(P < 0.05), and the temperature measured by red external ear thermometer and vital signs detector were higher than that by infrared frontal body thermometer (P < 0.05).
      ConclusionsWhen the body temperature of emergency patients is measured, the frontal thermometer should only be used as preliminary screening, and the ear thermometer and vital sign thermometer have are good accuracy, little difference, and are suitable for clinical use in emergency patients.

       

    /

    返回文章
    返回