Advertisement

Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics

, Volume 30, Issue 12, pp 1583–1585 | Cite as

Temperature variations within and between incubators—a prospective, observational study

  • Meredith W. Walker
  • Julia M. Butler
  • H. Lee HigdonIII
  • William R. BooneEmail author
Assisted Reproduction Technologies

Abstract

Purpose

To determine if there is a temperature variation within and between incubators.

Methods

This prospective, experimental trial with external controls was performed at an Assisted Reproductive Technology laboratory in a tertiary-care, university hospital. Temperature values were taken at various locations within and between incubators.

Results

Even though they were both set to 37.0 °C, the same make and model incubators had significantly different internal temperatures. Temperatures differed significantly among top, middle and bottom shelves and between fronts and backs of shelves.

Conclusion(s)

We found temperatures differed within and between our front-loading incubators. Thus, laboratory personnel should evaluate their incubators for temperature variations within and between incubators and, if temperatures differ significantly, develop a plan to deal with discrepancies.

Keywords

Temperature Incubator Quality control Assisted reproductive technology ART 

Notes

Conflicts of interest

None of the authors has a conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Magli MC, Van Den Abbel E, Lundin K, Royere D, Van der Elst J, Gianaroli L. Revised guidelines for good practice in IVF laboratories. Hum Reprod. 2008;23:1253–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Eng LA, Kornegay ET, Huntington J, Wellman T. Effects of incubation temperature and bicarbonate on maturation of pig oocytes in vitro. J Reprod Fertil. 1986;76:657–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Abramczuk JW, Lopata A. Incubator performance in the clinical in vitro fertilization program: importance of temperature conditions for the fertilization and cleavage of human oocytes. Fertil Steril. 1986;46:132–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kimmel GL, Williams PL, Claggett TW, Kimmel CA. Response-surface analysis of exposure-duration relationships: the effects of hyperthermia on embryonic development of the rat in vitro. Toxicol Sci. 2002;69:391–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Higdon HL, Blackhurst DW, Boone WR. Incubator management in an assisted reproductive technology laboratory. Fertil Steril. 2008;89:703–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Butler JM, Johnson JE, Boone WR. The heat is on: room temperature affects laboratory equipment—an observational study. J Assist Reprod Gen. 2013. doi: 10.1007/s10815-013-0064-4.
  7. 7.
    Bove R. Temperature measurement in the clinical laboratory…good isn’t good enough. Med Lab Obs. 2011;43:36–9.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Meredith W. Walker
    • 1
  • Julia M. Butler
    • 2
  • H. Lee HigdonIII
    • 2
  • William R. Boone
    • 2
    Email author
  1. 1.Greenville Health SystemMedical Experience AcademyGreenvilleUSA
  2. 2.Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyGreenville Health System University Medical GroupGreenvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations