Skip to main content
Log in

Modern electronic and chemical thermometers used in the axilla are inaccurate

  • General Pediatrics
  • Published:
European Journal of Pediatrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Abstract

Rectal and axillary temperatures were measured simultaneously in 83 children using three different thermometer devices providing 166 pairs of results. In the first series consisting of 22 febrile children (44 measurements) and 20 afebrile children (40 measurements), the rectal mercury measurement was compared to an axillary mercury and axillary Tempa-DOT thermometer. The axillary mercury had sensitivity of 14/22 (64%) and specificity of 20/20 (100%) while the Tempa-DOT had sensitivity of 15/22 (68%) and specificity of 19/20 (95%). In the second series comprising 21 febrile children (42 measurements) and 20 afebrile children (40 measurements) the axillary mercury had sensitivity of 11/21 (52%) and specificity of 20/20 (100%) while the electronic thermometer had sensitivity of 10/21 (48%) and specificity of 20/20 (100%). Regardless of the thermometer used, the axilla is a poor alternative to rectal measurements in the diagnosis of fever.

Conclusion

Mercury-free thermometers, when used in the axilla are as poor alternatives to reetal measurements as mercury-in-glass thermometers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Atkins E (1984) Fever: The old and the new. J Infect Dis 149:339–349

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Blainey CG (1974) Site selection in taking body temperature. Am J Nurs 74:1859–1861

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Blumethal I (1992) Should we ban the mercury thermometer? Discussion paper. J Royal Soc Med 85:553–555

    Google Scholar 

  4. Blumenthal I (1991) Which thermometer? The Lancet 337:1483

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Chellapah G (1980) Aspects of thermoregulation in term and preterm newborn babies. University of Nottingham, Nottingham

    Google Scholar 

  6. Frank J D, Brown S (1978) Thermometers and rectal perforations in the neonate. Arch Dis Child 53:824–825

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Karlberg P (1949) The significance of depth of insertion of the thermometer for recording the rectal temperature. Acta Paediatr Scand 38:359–366

    Google Scholar 

  8. Kresh MJ (1984) Axillary temperature as a screening test for fever in children. J. Pediatr 4:596–599

    Google Scholar 

  9. Morley CJ, Hewson PH, Thornton AJ, Cole TJ (1992) Axillary and rectal temperature measurements in infants. Arch Dis Child 67:122–125

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Nichols G (1966) Oral, axillary and rectal temperature determinations and relationships. Narse Res 31:274–277

    Google Scholar 

  11. Ogren JM (1990) The inaccuracy of axillary temperatures measured with an electronic thermometer. Am J Dis Child 144:109–111

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Payne D, Johnson A, McKenzie S, Rogers M (1994) Chemical and glass thermometers for axillary temperatures: how do they compare? Arch Dis Child 71:259–260

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Smith L, Prince HN, Johnson E (1981) Bacteriologic studies on electronic hospital thermometers. Infect Contol 4:315–316

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Zengeya, S.T., Blumenthal, I. Modern electronic and chemical thermometers used in the axilla are inaccurate. Eur J Pediatr 155, 1005–1008 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02532519

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02532519

Key words

Navigation