Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33472462›Full record

Trial reportThe Journal of international medical research2021

Use of non-contact infrared thermometers in rehabilitation patients: a randomized controlled study.

Zhen Chen, Hui Wang, Yi Wang, Hongmei Lin, Xiuping Zhu, Yaqin Wang

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in The Journal of international medical research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Zhen ChenNeurorehabilitation Centre, First Rehabilitation Hospital of Shanghai/Affiliated Hospital of Tongji University (Preparatory), No. 349 Hangzhou Road, Yangpu District, Shanghai, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3565-5707
Hui WangNeurorehabilitation Centre, First Rehabilitation Hospital of Shanghai/Affiliated Hospital of Tongji University (Preparatory), No. 349 Hangzhou Road, Yangpu District, Shanghai, China.
Yi WangCenter for Translational Neurodegeneration and Regenerative Therapy, Shanghai Tenth People's Hospital affiliated to Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Hongmei LinNeurorehabilitation Centre, First Rehabilitation Hospital of Shanghai/Affiliated Hospital of Tongji University (Preparatory), No. 349 Hangzhou Road, Yangpu District, Shanghai, China.
Xiuping ZhuNeurorehabilitation Centre, First Rehabilitation Hospital of Shanghai/Affiliated Hospital of Tongji University (Preparatory), No. 349 Hangzhou Road, Yangpu District, Shanghai, China.
Yaqin WangNeurorehabilitation Centre, First Rehabilitation Hospital of Shanghai/Affiliated Hospital of Tongji University (Preparatory), No. 349 Hangzhou Road, Yangpu District, Shanghai, China.
Shanghai Sunshine Rehabilitation Center · CNTongji University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveIn this randomized controlled study, we aimed to determine whether non-contact infrared thermometers (NCITs) are more time-efficient and create less patient distress than mercury axillary thermometers (MATs) and infrared tympanic thermometers (ITTs).

methodsForty-five rehabilitation inpatients were randomly assigned to one of three groups (NCIT, MAT, and ITT). Time required to measure body temperature with an NCIT, MAT, and ITT was recorded. We examined associations between time required to take patients' temperature and measuring device used. Patient distress experienced during temperature measurement using the three thermometers was recorded.

resultsA significantly longer average time was required to measure temperatures using the MAT (mean 43.17, standard deviation [SD] 8.39) than the ITT (mean 13.74, SD 1.63) and NCIT (mean 12.13, SD 1.18). The thermometer used influenced the time required to measure body temperature (t = 33.99). There were significant differences among groups (NCIT vs. ITT, NCIT vs. MAT, and ITT vs. MAT) regarding patient distress among the different thermometers. Most distress arose owing to needing help from others, sleep disruption, and boredom.

conclusionThe NCIT has clinically relevant advantages over the ITT and MAT in measuring body temperature among rehabilitation patients, including saving nurses' time and avoiding unnecessary patient distress.Clinical trial registration number (http://www.chictr.org.cn): ChiCTR1800019756.

Indexed as

ThermometersTympanic MembraneAxillaBody TemperatureHumansInfrared Raysbody temperature measurementinfrared tympanic thermometermercury axillary thermometerNon-contact infrared thermometerrandomized controlled studyrehabilitation

Identifiers

PMID33472462
PMCPMC7829519
OpenAlexW3123224177

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.