ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: During the 2003 Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) outbreak, all schools in Singapore implemented twice-daily temperature monitoring for students to curtail the spread of the disease. Students were not allowed to attend school if their temperature readings were >37.8 degrees C for students < or =12 years old, or > or =37.5 degrees C for students >12 years old. These values had been arbitrarily determined with professional inputs. The aim of this study is to determine the reference ranges of normal oral temperatures of students in Singapore and recommend the cut-off values for febrile patients. This may be used in another similar outbreak of an infectious disease with fever. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four co-ed primary schools and 4 co-ed secondary schools were selected for this study. Four thousand and two hundred primary 1 to secondary 3 students responded (96.8%) and participated in this cross-sectional study. The mean ages of the students in the lowest (primary 1) and highest educational levels (secondary 3) were 7.4 years old and 15.3 years old, respectively. Twelve oral temperature readings per student (i.e. measurements taken 4 times a day in 3 consecutive days) were collected. Forty-six thousand seven hundred and eighty-three (92.8%) out of 50,400 temperature readings were used for the analysis as missing data were excluded. A quantile regression model was applied to estimate reference ranges of normal oral temperatures for students with adjustment for potential confounding factors. RESULTS: The age-specific reference ranges of normal oral temperature from this study for students < or =12 years old and >12 years old were 35.7 degrees C to 37.7 degrees C and 35.6 degrees C to 37.4 degrees C, respectively. Temperatures of 37.8 degrees C and 37.5 degrees C are therefore recommended as the oral temperature cut-offs for those < or =12 years old and >12 years old, respectively. CONCLUSION: This study has provided empirical data on normal oral temperature cut-offs which could be used during temperature screening in schools.
Subject(s)
Body Temperature , Adolescent , Child , Circadian Rhythm , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Reference Values , Schools , Singapore , StudentsABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To compare the sensitivity and specificity of a widespread method of screening for refractive errors in Singapore schoolchildren using a simplified acuity screening chart with a more rigorous method using the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart. A secondary aim is to estimate the best cutoff values for the detection of refractive errors using these two methods. METHODS: This is a population-based study, involving 1779 schoolchildren from three schools in Singapore. Logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) visual acuity was recorded using a modified Bailey-Lovie chart by trained optometrists, and visual acuity measurement was also undertaken using a simplified 7-line visual acuity screening chart by school health nurses. The main outcome measures were the receiver-operating characteristics (ROC's) of logMAR and the simplified screening visual acuity to detect myopia or any refractive errors. The difference between measurements, simplified screening visual acuity--logMAR visual acuity, was calculated. RESULTS: The optimal threshold using the simplified screening visual acuity chart for the detection of myopia or any refractive error was 6/12 or worse. Using logMAR visual acuity, the most efficient threshold for the detection of myopia was 0.26, but this was 0.18 for the detection of any refractive error. The area under the ROC curves was significantly greater in the case of the logMAR visual acuity measurement compared with the simplified screening visual acuity measurement for the detection of myopia or any refractive errors. The 95% limits of agreement for the two methods (simplified screening--logMAR acuity) was -0.219 to +0.339. CONCLUSIONS: Bearing in mind that the visual acuity measurements were performed by two different groups of professionals, visual acuity screening using the ETDRS method appears to be more accurate than the simplified charts for the detection of myopia or any refractive errors in children.
