Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 17 de 17
Filter
1.
J Med Syst ; 46(12): 91, 2022 Nov 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2094701

ABSTRACT

In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, wearable sensors are important for early detection of critical illness especially in COVID-19 outpatients. We sought to determine in this pilot study whether a wearable in-ear sensor for continuous body temperature and heart rate monitoring (Cosinuss company, Munich) is sufficiently accurate for body temperature and heart rate monitoring. Comparing with several anesthesiologic standard of care monitoring devices (urinary bladder and zero-heat flux thermometer and ECG), we evaluated the in-ear sensor during non-cardiac surgery (German Clinical Trials Register Reg.-No: DRKS00012848). Limits of Agreement (LoA) based on Bland-Altman analysis were used to study the agreement between the in-ear sensor and the reference methods. The estimated LoA of the Cosinuss One and bladder temperature monitoring were [-0.79, 0.49] °C (95% confidence intervals [-1.03, -0.65] (lower LoA) and [0.35, 0.73] (upper LoA)), and [-0.78, 0.34] °C (95% confidence intervals [-1.18, -0.59] (lower LoA) and [0.16, 0.74] (upper LoA)) of the Cosinuss One and zero-heat flux temperature monitoring. 89% and 79% of Cosinuss One temperature monitoring were within ± 0.5 °C limit of bladder and zero-heat flux monitoring, respectively. The estimated LoA of Cosinuss One and ECG heart rate monitoring were [-4.81, 4.27] BPM (95% confidence intervals [-5.09, -4.56] (lower LoA) and [4.01, 4.54] (upper LoA)). The proportion of detection differences within ± 2BPM was 84%. Body temperature and heart rate were reliably measured by the wearable in-ear sensor.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Wearable Electronic Devices , Humans , Temperature , Pilot Projects , Heart Rate/physiology , Pandemics , COVID-19/diagnosis , Body Temperature/physiology
2.
Brain Behav Immun ; 99: 157-165, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1456985

ABSTRACT

Thermoregulation is a complex, dynamic process involving coordination between multiple autonomic, endocrine, and behavioral mechanisms. In the context of infection, this intricate machinery generates fever, a process believed to serve vital functions in the body's defense against pathogens. In addition to increasing core temperature, infection can lead to changes in the dynamic fluctuations in body temperature over time. The patterns of these deviations may convey information about the health of the body and the course of illness. Here, we utilized dynamic structural equation modeling to explore patterns of body temperature change following an experimental respiratory virus challenge in an aggregated, archival dataset of human participants (N = 1,412). We also examined whether temperature dynamics during infection were related to symptom severity, as well as individual differences in biomarkers of inflammation and stress. We found that individuals meeting the criteria for infection exhibited higher but less stable body temperatures over time compared to those not meeting criteria of infection. While temperature parameters did not reliably predict symptom severity, higher levels of nasal proinflammatory cytokines were associated with lower, more consistent temperatures during the study period. Further, levels of salivary cortisol and urinary catecholamines measured at the beginning of the study appeared to have disparate effects on temperature change. In sum, this research highlights the utility of dynamic time series modeling as a framework for studying body temperature change and lends novel insights into how stress may interact with infection to influence patterns of thermoregulation.


Subject(s)
Body Temperature Regulation , Hydrocortisone , Body Temperature/physiology , Body Temperature Regulation/physiology , Fever , Humans , Inflammation , Temperature
3.
J Occup Environ Hyg ; 18(9): 430-435, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1354224

ABSTRACT

Personal protective equipment used by healthcare workers to mitigate disease transmission risks while caring for patients with high-consequence infectious diseases can impair normal body cooling mechanisms and exacerbate physiological strain. Symptoms of heat strain (e.g., cognitive impairment, confusion, muscle cramping) are especially harmful in the high-risk environment of high-consequence infectious disease care. In this pilot study, the core body temperatures of healthcare workers were assessed using an ingestible, wireless-transmission thermometer while performing patient care tasks common to a high-level isolation unit setting in powered air purifying respirator (PAPR)-level. The objective was to determine the potential for occupational health hazard due to heat stress in an environmentally controlled unit. Maximum core temperatures of the six participants ranged from 37.4 °C (99.3 °F) to 39.9 °C (103.8°F) during the 4-hr shift; core temperatures of half (n = 3) of the participants exceeded 38.5 °C (101.3 °F), the upper core temperature limit. Future investigations are needed to identify other heat stress risks both in and outside of controlled units. The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic offers unique opportunities for field-based research on risks of heat stress related to personal protective equipment in healthcare workers that can lead to both short- and long-term innovations in this field.


Subject(s)
Body Temperature/physiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Heat Stress Disorders/etiology , Patient Isolation , Personal Protective Equipment/adverse effects , Adult , Body Mass Index , Female , Health Personnel , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Occupational Health , Pandemics , Pilot Projects , SARS-CoV-2
4.
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 100(27): e25938, 2021 Jul 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1299017

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT: 2019 Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) is a new acute infectious disease of respiratory system, posed a great threat to human health because of its strong infectivity and rapid progress. This study aimed to assess the severity of COVID-19 Pneumonia by analyzing the change of CT manifestations and body temperature.This retrospective review included 22 patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. The imaging manifestations and clinical features were observed and evaluated.Most of the infected patients were men (13/22, 59%). Fever (>38°C) (17/22, 77%) and cough (6/22, 27%) were the main symptoms. Leukocytes count decreased in 23% of patients and lymphocyte decreased in 41%. Twenty-one patients with pneumonia had abnormal findings on chest CT. The special CT manifestations were observed at the first CT examination when the lesions progressed, including a single ground glass nodule with uneven density, multiple ground glass opacities distributed in subpleural, and the ground glass opacities confined in superior lobe. The special CT manifestations were observed at the first CT examination when the lesions resolved, including ground glass opacities with homogeneous density. The lesion involved in the bilateral lungs and the absorption of the lesions mainly occurred in bilateral inferior lobes. Three patients had normalized body temperature increased more than 1°C within 1 to 2 days after admission. Ten patients fluctuated more than 1°C within 1 to 7 days after admission and the second CT scans showed the disease was at the progressive stage.Dynamic analysis of CT manifestations and body temperature have the potential to predict the severity of COVID-19 pneumonia.


Subject(s)
Body Temperature/physiology , COVID-19/diagnosis , Lung/diagnostic imaging , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Tomography, X-Ray Computed/methods , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/physiopathology , Disease Progression , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Predictive Value of Tests , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors
5.
Sci Rep ; 11(1): 11901, 2021 06 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1260949

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to the rapid adoption and rollout of thermal camera-based Infrared Thermography (IRT) systems for fever detection. These systems use facial infrared emissions to detect individuals exhibiting an elevated core-body temperature, which is present in many symptomatic presentations of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Despite the rollout of these systems, there is little independent research supporting their efficacy. The primary objective of this study was to assess the precision and accuracy of IRT screening solutions in a real-world scenario. The method used was a single-centre, observational study investigating the agreement of three IRT systems compared to digital oral thermometer measurements of body temperature. Over 5 days, 107 measurements were taken from individuals wearing facial masks. During each entry, two measurements of the subject's body temperature were made from each system to allow for the evaluation of the measurement precision, followed by an oral thermometer measurement. Each participant also answered a short demographic survey. This study found that the precision of the IRT systems was wider than 0.3 °C claimed accuracy of two of the systems. This study also found that the IRT measurements were only weakly correlated to those of the oral temperature. Additionally, it was found that demographic characteristics (age, gender, and mask-type) impacted the measurement error. This study indicates that using IRT systems in front-line scenarios poses a potential risk, where a lack of measurement accuracy could possibly allow febrile individuals to pass through undetected. Further research is required into methods which could increase accuracy and improve the techniques viability.


Subject(s)
Body Temperature/physiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Skin Temperature/physiology , COVID-19/diagnosis , Humans , Infrared Rays , Mass Screening/methods , Thermometers
7.
Br J Nurs ; 30(5): 288-295, 2021 Mar 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1140806

ABSTRACT

This article explores body temperature and the physiological process of thermoregulation. Normal body temperature and body temperature changes are discussed, including comorbidities associated with body temperature and signs of hyperthermia and hypothermia, and the factors that affect intraoperative temperature regulation. The evidence base behind thermometry is discussed and is applied to contemporary clinical conditions and symptoms, including: sepsis and suspected COVID-19. After discussing clinical considerations and regulations that encompass thermometry, three case studies present the use of the Genius 3 Tympanic Thermometer in clinical practice, with user feedback supporting its benefits, which include speed, accuracy and ease of use.


Subject(s)
Body Temperature/physiology , Thermometers , Tympanic Membrane/physiology , COVID-19/diagnosis , Complementary Therapies , Critical Care , Humans , Monitoring, Physiologic/instrumentation , Reproducibility of Results , Sepsis/diagnosis , Time Factors
8.
J Med Eng Technol ; 45(2): 136-144, 2021 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1104643

ABSTRACT

There has been a marked rise in the number of avoidable deaths in health services around the world. At the same time there has been a growing increase in antibiotic resistant so-called "superbugs." We examine here the potential role of body temperature measurement in these adverse trends. Electronic based thermometers have replaced traditional mercury (and other liquid-in-glass type) thermometers for reasons of safety rather than superiority. Electronic thermometers are in general less robust from a measurement perspective than their predecessors. We illustrate the implications of unreliable temperature measurement on the diagnosis and management of disease, including COVID-19, through statistical calculations. Since a return to mercury thermometers is both undesirable and impractical, we call for better governance in the current practice of clinical thermometry to ensure the traceability and long-term accuracy of electronic thermometers and discuss how this could be achieved.


Subject(s)
Body Temperature/physiology , Thermometry/methods , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/physiopathology , Humans , Practice Guidelines as Topic , SARS-CoV-2 , Thermometers/adverse effects , Thermometers/standards , Thermometry/adverse effects , Thermometry/instrumentation , Thermometry/standards , Uncertainty
9.
J Wildl Dis ; 57(1): 238-241, 2021 01 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1106370

ABSTRACT

The global SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and the role of bats in zoonotic spillover have renewed interest in the flight-as-fever hypothesis, which posits that high body temperatures experienced by bats during flight contribute to their high viral tolerance. We argue that flight-as-fever is unlikely to explain why bats harbor more viruses than other mammals on the basis of two lines of reasoning. First, flight temperatures reported in the literature overestimate true flight temperatures because of methodologic limitations. Second, body temperatures in bats are only high relative to humans, and not relative to many other mammals. We provide examples of mammals from diverse habitats to show that temperatures in excess of 40 C during activity are quite common in species with lower viral diversity than bats. We caution scientists against stating the flight-as-fever hypothesis as unquestioned truth, as has repeatedly occurred in the popular media in the wake of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.


Subject(s)
Body Temperature/physiology , Chiroptera/physiology , Chiroptera/virology , SARS-CoV-2/physiology , Animals , Carrier State/veterinary , Carrier State/virology , Disease Reservoirs/virology , Flight, Animal/physiology , Zoonoses
10.
J Emerg Med ; 59(6): 952-956, 2020 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1065314

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: As many businesses reopen after government-induced restrictions, many public agencies and private companies, such as banks, golf courses, and stores, are using temperature screening to assess for possible coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection both for patrons and for employees. OBJECTIVE: We assessed the frequency of a fever ≥100.4°F and other symptoms associated with COVID-19 among patients in the emergency department (ED) who were tested in the ED for the illness. METHODS: This is a retrospective review of data from patients who were tested for acute COVID-19 infection from March 10, 2020 through June 30, 2020 at two EDs within the same health care system. Data collected included temperature, the presence or recent history of COVID-19-related symptoms, and COVID-19 test results. Descriptive statistics are reported for presenting fever and other COVID-19-related symptoms alone and in combination with presenting fever. RESULTS: A total of 6894 patients were tested for COVID-19. Among these, 330 (4.8%) tested positive for active infection. Of these patients, 64 (19.4%) presented with a fever ≥100.4°F (≥38.0°C). Increasing the number of COVID-19-related symptoms in combination with a presenting fever ≥100.4°F increased the number of people who could be identified as having a COVID-19 infection. CONCLUSIONS: About a quarter of patients who were tested positive for COVID-19 in our ED did not have a fever at presentation ≥100.4°F. Using only temperature to screen for COVID-19 in the community setting will likely miss the majority of patients with active disease.


Subject(s)
Body Temperature/physiology , COVID-19/physiopathology , Thermometers/trends , COVID-19/diagnosis , Fever/diagnosis , Fever/physiopathology , Humans , Mass Screening/methods , Mass Screening/standards , Mass Screening/statistics & numerical data , Prospective Studies , Retrospective Studies
12.
J Am Geriatr Soc ; 68(12): 2716-2720, 2020 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-840738

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Infection screening tools classically define fever as 38.0°C (100.4°F). Frail older adults may not mount the same febrile response to systemic infection as younger or healthier individuals. We evaluate temperature trends among nursing home (NH) residents undergoing diagnostic SARS-CoV-2 testing and describe the diagnostic accuracy of temperature measurements for predicting test-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study evaluating diagnostic accuracy of pre-SARS-CoV-2 testing temperature changes. SETTING: Two separate NH cohorts tested diagnostically (e.g., for symptoms) for SARS-CoV-2. PARTICIPANTS Veterans residing in Veterans Affairs (VA) managed NHs and residents in a private national chain of community NHs. MEASUREMENTS: For both cohorts, we determined the sensitivity, specificity, and Youden's index with different temperature cutoffs for SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction results. RESULTS: The VA cohort consisted of 1,301 residents in 134 facilities from March 1, 2020, to May 14, 2020, with 25% confirmed for SARS-CoV-2. The community cohort included 3,368 residents spread across 282 facilities from February 18, 2020, to June 9, 2020, and 42% were confirmed for SARS-CoV-2. The VA cohort was younger, less White, and mostly male. A temperature testing threshold of 37.2°C has better sensitivity for SARS-CoV-2, 76% and 34% in the VA and community NH, respectively, versus 38.0°C with 43% and 12% sensitivity, respectively. CONCLUSION: A definition of 38.0°C for fever in NH screening tools should be lowered to improve predictive accuracy for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Stakeholders should carefully consider the impact of adopting lower testing thresholds on testing availability, cost, and burden on staff and residents. Temperatures alone have relatively low sensitivity/specificity, and we advocate any threshold be used as part of a screening tool, along with other signs and symptoms of infection.


Subject(s)
Aging/physiology , Body Temperature/physiology , COVID-19 , Nursing Homes/statistics & numerical data , Thermography , Veterans Health Services/statistics & numerical data , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/physiopathology , COVID-19 Testing/methods , Dimensional Measurement Accuracy , Female , Homes for the Aged/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Mass Screening/methods , Mass Screening/standards , SARS-CoV-2 , Sensitivity and Specificity , Thermography/methods , Thermography/standards , Thermography/statistics & numerical data , United States/epidemiology
13.
J Med Eng Technol ; 44(8): 468-471, 2020 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-800821

ABSTRACT

COVID-19 pandemics required a reorganisation of social spaces to prevent the spread of the virus. Due to the common presence of fever in the symptomatic patients, temperature measurement is one of the most common screening protocols. Indeed, regulations in many countries require temperature measurements before entering shops, workplaces, and public buildings. Due to the necessity of providing rapid non-contact and non-invasive protocols to measure body temperature, infra-red thermometry is mostly used. Many countries are now facing the need to organise the return to school and universities in the COVID-19 era, which require solutions to prevent the risk of contagion between students and/or teachers and technical/administrative staff. This paper highlights and discusses some of the strengths and limitations of infra-red cameras, including the site of measurements and the influence of the environment, and recommends to be careful to consider such measurements as a single "safety rule" for a good return to normality.


Subject(s)
Body Temperature/physiology , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Schools , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/physiopathology , Fever/diagnosis , Humans , Infrared Rays , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/physiopathology , SARS-CoV-2 , Thermography
15.
Emerg Med Australas ; 32(5): 867-869, 2020 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-612726

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To report the incidence of fever among patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 at a single centre. Temperature at time of testing and on repeat testing within 24 h were collected. RESULTS: At the time of testing, fever was detected (sensitivity) in 16 of 86 (19%; 95% confidence interval 11-28) episodes of positive tests for SARS-CoV-2. With repeat testing, fever was detected in 18 of 75 (24%; 95% confidence interval 15-35) episodes. CONCLUSIONS: In an Australian hospital, screening for fever lacked sensitivity for detection of patients with SARS-CoV-2.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Fever/diagnosis , Mass Screening/methods , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Australia , Body Temperature/physiology , COVID-19 , Cohort Studies , Confidence Intervals , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Female , Fever/epidemiology , Humans , Incidence , Male , Pandemics/statistics & numerical data , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies , Risk Assessment , Sensitivity and Specificity , Tertiary Care Centers
16.
J Am Med Dir Assoc ; 21(7): 895-899.e1, 2020 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-591519

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Many nursing home residents infected with SARS-CoV-2 fail to be identified with standard screening for the associated COVID-19 syndrome. Current nursing home COVID-19 screening guidance includes assessment for fever, defined as a temperature of at least 38.0°C. The objective of this study was to describe the temperature changes before and after universal testing for SARS-CoV-2 in nursing home residents. DESIGN: Cohort study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: The Veterans Administration (VA) operates 134 Community Living Centers (CLC), similar to nursing homes, that house residents who cannot live independently. VA guidance to CLCs directed daily clinical screening for COVID-19 that included temperature assessment. MEASURES: All CLC residents (n = 7325) underwent SARS-CoV-2 testing. We report the temperature in the window of 14 days before and after universal SARS-CoV-2 testing among CLC residents. Baseline temperature was calculated for 5 days before the study window. RESULTS: SARS-CoV-2 was identified in 443 (6.0%) residents. The average maximum temperature in SARS-CoV-2-positive residents was 37.66 (0.69) compared with 37.11 (0.36) (P = .001) in SARS-CoV-2-negative residents. Temperatures in those with SARS-CoV-2 began rising 7 days before testing and remained elevated during the 14-day follow-up. Among SARS-CoV-2-positive residents, only 26.6% (n = 118) met the fever threshold of 38.0°C during the survey period. Most residents (62.5%, n = 277) with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 did experience 2 or more 0.5°C elevations above their baseline values. One cohort of SARS-CoV-2 residents' (20.3%, n = 90) temperatures never deviated >0.5°C from baseline. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: A single screening for temperature is unlikely to detect nursing home residents with SARS-CoV-2. Repeated temperature measurement with a patient-derived baseline can increase sensitivity. The current fever threshold as a screening criteria for SARS-CoV-2 infection should be reconsidered.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Fever/diagnosis , Mass Screening/methods , Nursing Homes/organization & administration , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Skilled Nursing Facilities/organization & administration , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Body Temperature/physiology , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/methods , Cohort Studies , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Disease Outbreaks/prevention & control , Early Diagnosis , Female , Fever/epidemiology , Humans , Infection Control , Male , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Thermometers/statistics & numerical data , United States , Veterans
17.
Sensors (Basel) ; 20(10)2020 May 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-306261

ABSTRACT

Many types of thermometers have been developed to measure body temperature. Infrared thermometers (IRT) are fast, convenient and ease to use. Two types of infrared thermometers are uses to measure body temperature: tympanic and forehead. With the spread of COVID-19 coronavirus, forehead temperature measurement is used widely to screen people for the illness. The performance of this type of device and the criteria for screening are worth studying. This study evaluated the performance of two types of tympanic infrared thermometers and an industrial infrared thermometer. The results showed that these infrared thermometers provide good precision. A fixed offset between tympanic and forehead temperature were found. The measurement values for wrist temperature show significant offsets with the tympanic temperature and cannot be used to screen fevers. The standard operating procedure (SOP) for the measurement of body temperature using an infrared thermometer was proposed. The suggestion threshold for the forehead temperature is 36 °C for screening of fever. The body temperature of a person who is possibly ill is then measured using a tympanic infrared thermometer for the purpose of a double check.


Subject(s)
Body Temperature/physiology , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Fever/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Thermometers , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/physiopathology , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Fever/physiopathology , Fever/virology , Forehead/physiopathology , Humans , Infrared Rays , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/physiopathology , Pneumonia, Viral/virology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL