三种体温测量方法的一致性评价  

Agreement of three body temperature measurement devices

作　　者：刁玲玲[1] 赵晓玲[1] 张婷婷[1] 何媛媛 方芳[1] Diao Lingling;Zhao Xiaoling;Zhang Tingting;He Yuanyuan;Fang Fang(Department of Infectious Diseases,The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University,Nanjing 210029, China)

机构地区：[1]南京医科大学第一附属医院感染病科,江苏南京210029

出　　处：《护理学杂志》2018年第11期49-51,共3页Journal of Nursing Science

摘　　要：目的探讨临床发热待查患者简便、精准、安全的体温测量方法。方法对31例发热待查患者,以自我对照法分别使用水银体温计测量口温、红外耳温仪测量耳温和体温遥测装置测量体表温度,检验三种体温测量方法的一致性。结果三种测量方法所测体温数据比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);体温遥测装置所测体表温度与水银计所测口温95%一致性界限为(-1.100,1.041),一致性界限外占比2.97%,优于另两两组合;体温遥测装置与红外耳温仪测得的体温ICC=0.246,95%CI=0.025~0.416,低于另两两组合。结论体温遥测装置所测体表温度与水银计所测口温一致性相对较好,体温遥测装置测温可代替水银体温计测量患者体温。Objective To explore an easy-to-operate,accurate and safe body temperature measurement for patients with fever of unknown origin（FUO）.Methods Thirty-one patients with FUO were recruited.Temperature readings were obtained using the oral mercury-in-glass thermometer,the infrared tympanic thermometer and the epidermal RFID passive sensor.Intraclass correlation coefficients（ICCs） and the 95% confidence interval（CI） for the ICCs,and Bland and Altman method were employed to assess agreement.Results No significant differences in temperature recordings emerged among the three devices of temperature measurement（P〉0.05）.Bland-Altman analysis revealed a better agreement between epidermal sensor and oral mercury-in-glass thermometer than the other two combinations,with 95% limits of agreement being（-1.100,1.041） and 97.03% measurements within the 95%limits of agreement.ICC between epidermal sensor and infrared tympanic thermometer was the lowest,with the ICC 0.246 and 95% CI for ICC between 0.025 and 0.416.Conclusion Epidermal RFID sensor is a safe and accurate alternative to the more traditional mercury-in-glass thermometer.

关 键 词：发热 测量体温 水银体温计 红外耳温仪 体温遥测装置 一致性评价 

分 类 号：R472[医药卫生—护理学]