ABSTRACT
AIMS: To compare alternative methods of recording body temperature (BT) with rectal temperature (RT) in clinically healthy dogs. METHODS: This prospective study included 97 healthy mixed-breed dogs (43 females and 54 males). The gingival temperature (GT) was collected by using a human non-contact, infrared forehead thermometer, while ocular temperature (OT) and metacarpal pad temperature (MPT) were obtained with an infrared thermal camera. The degree of agreement was determined using the Bland-Altman method, with RT considered as the reference temperature. RESULTS: A total of 382 readings were obtained from four different anatomical regions. The mean difference and their 95% limits of agreement for the differences between RT-GT, RT-OT, and RT-MPT were 0.18°C (-0.95°C-1.32°C), 0.79°C (-0.45°C-2.04°C), and 0.50°C (-0.63°C-1.62°C), respectively. The GT, OT, and MPT values were within ±0.5°C of RT for 65.9%, 19.5%, and 52.5% of dogs, respectively. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Although GT, OT, and MPT were a quick way to estimate BT in dogs, these measurements were not comparable with RT. The GT measurement achieved the best agreement with RT measurement (lowest bias and the highest proportion of measurements within ±0.5°C). The GT could be considered an option for monitoring changes to body temperature in clinically healthy dogs where RT measurement is not possible.
