Wearable Personal Core Body Temperature Measurement Considering Individual Differences and Dynamic Tissue Blood Perfusion

Shan, Chengcheng; Hu, Jiawen; Zou, Jincheng; Zhao, Shiqing

doi:10.1109/jbhi.2021.3124551

Cited by 18 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Triple neck temperature detection still had the highest sensitivity of 0.998, whereas the temporal and frontal temperatures had sensitivities of 0.994 and 0.990, respectively. Remarkably, the triple wrist temperature detection sensitivity was only 0.949, which is inconsistent with that in previous reports, 20 , 46 , 47 questioning the accuracy of wrist temperature measurements for COVID-19 fever screening.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 97%

Reliability of Non-Contact Infrared Thermometers for Fever Screening Under COVID-19

Lai¹,

X²,

Wang³

et al. 2022

RMHP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Fever is one of the most typical clinical symptoms of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and non-contact infrared thermometers (NCITs) are commonly used to screen for fever. However, there is a lack of authoritative data to define a “fever” when an NCIT is used and previous studies have shown that NCIT readings fluctuate widely depending on ambient temperatures and the body surface site screened. The aim of this study was to establish cut-off points for normal temperatures of different body sites (neck, forehead, temples, and wrist) and investigate the accuracy of NCITs at various ambient temperatures to improve the standardization and accuracy of fever screening. Patients and Methods A prospective investigation was conducted among 904 participants in the outpatient and emergency departments of Chengdu Women’s and Children’s Central Hospital. Body temperature was measured using NCITs and mercury axillary thermometers. A receiver operating characteristic curve was used to determine the accuracy of body temperature detection at the four body surface sites. Data on participant characteristics were also collected. Results Among the four surface sites, the neck temperature detection group had the highest accuracy. When the neck temperature was 37.35°C as the optimum fever diagnostic threshold, the sensitivity was 0.866. The optimum fever diagnostic thresholds for forehead, temporal, and wrist temperature were 36.65°C, 36.65°C, and 36.75°C, respectively. Moreover, triple neck temperature detection had the highest sensitivity, up to 0.998, whereas the sensitivity of triple wrist temperature detections was 0.949. Notably, the accuracy of NCITs significantly reduced when the temperature was lower than 18°C. Conclusion Neck temperature had the highest accuracy among the four NCIT temperature measurement sites, with an optimum fever diagnostic threshold of 37.35°C. Considering the findings reported in our study, we recommend triple neck temperature detection with NCITs as the fever screening standard for COVID-19.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 97%

Reliability of Non-Contact Infrared Thermometers for Fever Screening Under COVID-19

Lai¹,

X²,

Wang³

et al. 2022

RMHP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Among the different wearable biosensing devices, temperature measurement has proven to be an important physiological parameter [29]. The accurate and continuous measurement of the human core body temperature by a wearable device is of great significance for human healthcare and disease monitoring [30,31]. However, accurate monitoring of body temperature often represents a challenge in clinical practice due to the different devices available, the site of measurement, and the possibility of the healthcare staff obtaining frequent measurements when continuous devices are not available.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recently, to eliminate the environmental effects and thus improve the accuracy in estimating core body temperature, methods based on direct and correcting temperature data for measurements with an infrared thermal camera [56] and methods based on a dynamic model for measurements with a passive heat flow sensor [57] were proposed. In addition, it has been shown that personalized models can improve measurement accuracy [30].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Novel Non-Invasive Thermometer for Continuous Core Body Temperature: Comparison with Tympanic Temperature in an Acute Stroke Clinical Setting

Ajčević

Stella

Furlanis

et al. 2022

Sensors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is a growing research interest in wireless non-invasive solutions for core temperature estimation and their application in clinical settings. This study aimed to investigate the use of a novel wireless non-invasive heat flux-based thermometer in acute stroke patients admitted to a stroke unit and compare the measurements with the currently used infrared (IR) tympanic temperature readings. The study encompassed 30 acute ischemic stroke patients who underwent continuous measurement (Tcore) with the novel wearable non-invasive CORE device. Paired measurements of Tcore and tympanic temperature (Ttym) by using a standard IR-device were performed 3–5 times/day, yielding a total of 305 measurements. The predicted core temperatures (Tcore) were significantly correlated with Ttym (r = 0.89, p < 0.001). The comparison of the Tcore and Ttym measurements by Bland–Altman analysis showed a good agreement between them, with a low mean difference of 0.11 ± 0.34 °C, and no proportional bias was observed (B = −0.003, p = 0.923). The Tcore measurements correctly predicted the presence or absence of Ttym hyperthermia or fever in 94.1% and 97.4% of cases, respectively. Temperature monitoring with a novel wireless non-invasive heat flux-based thermometer could be a reliable alternative to the Ttym method for assessing core temperature in acute ischemic stroke patients.

show abstract

“…In this study, we determined the optimal fever diagnostic thresholds at the four body surface measurement sites when the sensitivity fulfilled the requirements for fever screening (single sensitivity > 0.95). It is noteworthy that wrist temperature does not appear to be suitable for fever screening due to its low accuracy (49)(50)(51).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Optimal diagnostic fever thresholds using non-contact infrared thermometers under COVID-19

Fan

Liu

et al. 2022

Front. Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fever screening is an effective method to detect infectors associated with different variants of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) based on the fact that most infectors with COVID-19 have fever symptoms. Non-contact infrared thermometers (NCITs) are widely used in fever screening. Nevertheless, authoritative data is lacking in defining “fever” at different body surface sites when using NCITs. The purpose of this study was to determine the optimal diagnostic threshold for fever screening using NICTs at different body surface sites, to improve the accuracy of fever screening and provide theoretical reference for healthcare policy. Participants (n = 1860) who were outpatients or emergency patients at Chengdu Women's and Children's Central Hospital were recruited for this prospective investigation from March 1 to June 30, 2021. NCITs and mercury axillary thermometers were used to measure neck, temple, forehead and wrist temperatures of all participants. Receiver operating characteristic curves were used to reflect the accuracy of NCITs. Linear correlation analysis was used to show the effect of age on body temperature. Multilinear regression analysis was used to explore the association between non-febrile participant's covariates and neck temperature. The mean age of participants was 3.45 ± 2.85 years for children and 28.56 ± 7.25 years for adults. In addition 1,304 (70.1%) participants were children (≤12), and 683 (36.7%) were male. The neck temperature exhibited the highest accuracy among the four sites. Further the optimal fever diagnostic thresholds of NCITs at the four body surface measurement sites were neck (36.75 °C, sensitivity: 0.993, specificity: 0.858); temple (36.55 °C, sensitivity: 0.974, specificity: 0.874); forehead (36.45 °C, sensitivity: 0.961, specificity: 0.813); and wrist (36.15 °C, sensitivity: 0.951, specificity: 0.434). Based on the findings of our study, we recommend 36.15, 36.45, 36.55, and 36.75 °C as the diagnostic thresholds of fever at the wrist, forehead, temple and neck, respectively. Among the four surface sites, neck temperature exhibited the highest accuracy.

show abstract

Wearable Personal Core Body Temperature Measurement Considering Individual Differences and Dynamic Tissue Blood Perfusion

Cited by 18 publications

References 57 publications

Reliability of Non-Contact Infrared Thermometers for Fever Screening Under COVID-19

Reliability of Non-Contact Infrared Thermometers for Fever Screening Under COVID-19

A Novel Non-Invasive Thermometer for Continuous Core Body Temperature: Comparison with Tympanic Temperature in an Acute Stroke Clinical Setting

Optimal diagnostic fever thresholds using non-contact infrared thermometers under COVID-19

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About