Abstract
Measurement of core body temperature—clinical thermometry—provides critical information to anaesthetists during perioperative care. The value of this information is determined by the accuracy of the measurement device used. This accuracy must be maintained despite external influences such as the operating room temperature and the patient’s thermoregulatory defence. Presently, perioperative thermometers utilise invasive measurement sites. The public health challenge of the COVID-19 pandemic, however, has highlighted the use of non-invasive, non-contact infrared thermometers. The aim of this article is to review common existing thermometers used in perioperative care, their mechanisms of action, accuracy, and practicality in comparison to infrared non-contact thermometry used for population screening during a pandemic. Evidence currently shows that contact thermometry varies in accuracy and practicality depending on the site of measurements and the method of sterilisation or disposal between uses. Despite the benefits of being a non-invasive and non-contact device, infrared thermometry used for population temperature screening lacks the accuracy required in perioperative medicine. Inaccuracy may be a consequence of uncontrolled external temperatures, the patient’s actions prior to measurement, distance between the patient and the thermometer, and the different sites of measurement. A re-evaluation of non-contact thermometry is recommended, requiring new studies in more controlled environments.
Highlights
Received: 7 December 2021Monitoring of the five important vital signs—heart rate, blood pressure, respiratory rate, oxygen saturation, and temperature [1,2,3]—allow accurate diagnosis and treatment of pathological conditions
Studies where thermometry was mentioned in contexts other than perioperative medicine orwhere pubthermometry was mentioned in contexts other than perioperative medicine or public health lic health in humans were excluded
Due to a lack of available literature on infrared thermometers (IRT) and thermography for body temperature monitoring outside of public health use, a conclusion cannot be made on whether these technologies can be reliably used in perioperative medicine
Summary
Monitoring of the five important vital signs—heart rate, blood pressure, respiratory rate, oxygen saturation, and temperature [1,2,3]—allow accurate diagnosis and treatment of pathological conditions. The COVID-19 pandemic has seen significant expansion in the use of infrared thermometry, with thermometers used to detect individuals who are febrile, a common sign of the SARS-CoV-2 virus infection [5]. Hospitals, have issues with accuracy and provide setting intermittent measurenantly invasive contact devices inserted or measured directly at sites such as the bladder, ments [3]. As the norm shifts to social distancing andthe a preference for non-contact devices,methods we evaluate temperature monitoring in perioperative care. If accurate non-contact therexisting thermometers with the intent of identifying alternative methods for temperature mometers be identified, institutions wouldifreap the cost-benefits equipment requirmonitoringcan in perioperative care. Identified, institutionsmaintenance, would reap the cost-benefits of equipment requiring less disinfection, maintenance, and consumables
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
