Home Articles Downloads Forum Products Services EBME Expo Contact
Thread Like Summary
Huw, John Sandham, Teknologist
Total Likes: 6
Original Post (Thread Starter)
#63148 12/20/2012 4:46 PM
by Brian Long
Brian Long
Hi Guys is anyone out there using the HuBDIC infrared thermometer - if so what is it like? good bad or indifferent
Liked Replies
#75450 Jun 15th a 08:47 AM
by Alf
Alf
Just received this from IPEM COVID 19 Cross Speciality Community Digest - Friday June 12, 2020

Various hospitals have been looking at the viability of using infrared thermometry either in place of or alongside tympanic membrane or other measuring devices. A detailed review paper from February 2020 concluded that infrared thermometry is insufficiently accurate to replace tympanic thermometry in routine clinical use: evidence on non-contact thermometers shows that they fail to detect febrile patients accurately and are not suitable for acute settings. See: globalce.org/index.php/GlobalCE/article/view/67. NICE have published a guideline on temperature measurement around surgery that sets out some options for measuring core temperature and refers to the limitations of indirect methods – see: www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg65/chapter/Recommendations.

A detailed paper written by IPEM members with NPL is currently being prepared for publication. Information on this will be added to the COVID-19 National Overview of Clinical Engineering Issues when it is available. The same group is drawing up guidance for general users on suitable technologies.

With regard to the use of infrared screening at a large scale, the current consensus appears to be that it requires careful and consistent measurement techniques to pick up an individual's core temperature and so will be difficult to mass screen individuals quickly and reliably in practice for signs of infection using temperature monitoring. A recent editorial reiterates this problem and the lack of an evidence base for using thermal imaging technologies in large scale screening (Thermology International 30(1):5-6, February 2020) Infrared thermography for mass fever screening: repeating the mistakes of the past?). This suggests that these technologies are not suitable for deployment in UK hospitals without scientific involvement and detailed evaluation. There are also privacy and other operational concerns: for a general review of these and an overview of thermal imaging screening, see: fpf.org/2020/06/03/....

A presentation from Dr Kevin Howells from the Royal Free Hospital, London, for the PMSIG, on the limitations of infrared screening has been uploaded to the IPEM COVID-19 Community of Interest Library.

I hope this helps
3 members like this
#75441 Jun 10th a 11:54 AM
by Dustcap
Dustcap
So how far have we come?
I have gone through the archive for various threads on the Infrared Thermometers and have yet to find conclusive proof that these devices are any good from a technical point of view in regards to repair/calibration and above all else accurate measurements.
It seems that staff are seeing more and more of these devices on TV and seem to suddenly want them as they are "contactless", yet a blood pressure and saturation levels is performed with being contactless?
Has anyone in the UK found a suitable model to trial? Or are we still at the same stages that we were 8 years ago?
Any help appreciated, stay safe everyone.
2 members like this
#75444 Jun 11th a 11:30 AM
by John Sandham
John Sandham
Hi Dustcap, In this review: Non-Contact Thermometers for Detecting Fever: A Review of Clinical Effectiveness the Exergen and Thermofocus were two of the devices used to measure skin temperature.

In the summary of findings, with regard to the accuracy of thermal scanners for detecting febrile individuals, four studies expressed conclusions in favor of the utilization of thermal scanners for fever detection,(10,13,22,24) whereas one study stated that this type of device is unsuitable for this purpose due to a high proportion of false positives.(11)

Ultimately, non-contact measurement is not as accurate as in ear, skin probe, or rectal measurement, but is safer under current covid circumstances, and fine for the majority of patients. Surface measurement would be used in the most seriously ill patient, and non-contact measurement is also the simplest way to 'covid screen' patients, staff, and visitors.
1 member likes this
Who's Online Now
6 members (Huw, DTP, Dustcap, Rickycash, Geoff Hannis, Micle), 131 guests, and 22 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
Carl Read, DarrenRai, Arasli, qrzdx?, nealzal
9,883 Registered Users
Forum Statistics
Forums25
Topics10,793
Posts72,579
Members9,883
Most Online5,980
Jan 29th, 2020
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5