The use of thermometer protective sheets provides reliable measurement of rectal temperature: a prospective study in 500 dogs.

OBJECTIVES: To measure and compare rectal temperature measurement with and without thermometer protective sheaths. To survey veterinary practices regarding thermometer use and disinfection. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thermometers were validated with and without protective sheaths for accuracy and repeatability in a water bath with a high precision thermometer as reference. Then, the rectal temperature of 500 dogs was measured with and without protective sheaths in randomised order. The difference in temperature measured by the two methods was analysed with a generalised linear model with order of temperature measurement, life stage, dog size, body condition, level of consciousness, class of temperature and operator as explanatory variables. Practical thermometer use and disinfection was surveyed by online questionnaire. RESULTS: In the pre-clinical phase, study thermometers recorded average temperature differences of −0.05 ± 0.07°C (mean ± SD) and −0.03 ± 0.08°C with and without sheath, respectively and the coefficients of variation ranged from 0.1 to 0.5% with and without sheath. In the clinical study, temperatures measured with and without sheaths differed by less than ±0.2°C for 92% of the measurements. None of the explanatory variables were associated with the observed differences. Twenty-five percent of survey respondents were aware of the guidelines for disinfection of thermometers. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Thermometer protective sheaths do not affect the measurement of canine rectal temperature in the clinic.

[Comparison of two opioids with different kinetics for intravenous analgesia in outpatient multiple third molar avulsions]. / Comparaison de deux opioïdes de cinétique différente dans l'analgésie intraveineuse pour avulsion des dents de sagesse en ambulatoire.

INTRODUCTION: We had for aim to compare the effects of intra-operative opioid analgesia according to the drug kinetics. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a prospective, controlled, randomized, double-blinded trial including 60 patients scheduled for ambulatory multiple third molar avulsion. The general anesthesia, performed with propofol and analgesia was a target-controlled infusion of either remifentanil or sufentanil. The anesthesia was set to reach an optimal bispectral index and adjusted to a clinical target throughout the procedure. The main endpoints were: postoperative request for morphine and other opioids; postoperative pain; postoperative adverse effects of opioids. RESULTS: In the post-operative care unit (French acronym PACU), patients who received remifentanil were extubated earlier (17 vs. 26 min.), but had more pain and required twice more morphine for analgesia (6 vs. 3 mg), than those who had received sufentanil. However, the need for post-surgery oral opioid intake was greater in the sufentanil group, so the overall postoperative opioid consumption and patient satisfaction were identical in both groups. The time spent in the PACU was also identical for both groups. DISCUSSION: Using an ultra-short kinetic opioid such as remifentanil does not seem useful, since the shorter delay before extubation is compensated by a greater need for morphine in the PACU.