Axillary and rectal temperature measurements in infants

C J Morley, P H Hewson, A J Thornton, T J Cole, C J Morley, P H Hewson, A J Thornton, T J Cole

Abstract

Rectal and axillary temperatures were measured during the daytime in 281 infants seen randomly at home and 656 at hospital under 6 months old, using mercury-in-glass thermometers. The normal temperature range derived from the babies at home was 36.7-37.9 degrees C for rectal temperature and 35.6-37.2 degrees C for axillary temperature. Rectal temperature was higher than axillary in 98% of the measurements. The mean (SD) difference between rectal and axillary temperatures was 0.7 (0.5) degrees C, with a range of 3 degrees C. When used in hospital to detect high temperature, axillary temperature had a sensitivity of 73% compared with rectal temperature. This is too insensitive for accurate detection of an infant's high temperature. Rectal temperature measurement is safer than previously suggested: perforation has occurred in less than one in two million measurements. If an infant's temperature needs to be taken, rectal temperature should be used.

References

    1. Proc R Soc Med. 1965 Aug;58:615-6
    1. Am J Dis Child. 1966 Feb;111(2):197-200
    1. Ann Surg. 1964 Feb;159:244-51
    1. Clin Pediatr (Phila). 1963 May;2:223-4
    1. AMA J Dis Child. 1959 Jun;97(6):869-70
    1. Arch Dis Child. 1958 Aug;33(170):362-3
    1. AMA J Dis Child. 1957 Mar;93(3):255-8
    1. Arch Dis Child. 1991 Jan;66(1):106-10
    1. Arch Dis Child. 1991 Jan;66(1):100-5
    1. Arch Dis Child. 1990 Dec;65(12):1308-10
    1. Lancet. 1986 Feb 8;1(8476):307-10
    1. J Pediatr Surg. 1989 Sep;24(9):888-92
    1. Arch Dis Child. 1989 Apr;64(4):596-9
    1. Arch Dis Child. 1990 Apr;65(4 Spec No):380-2
    1. Am J Dis Child. 1990 Jan;144(1):109-11
    1. Lancet. 1981 Aug 8;2(8241):310
    1. J Pediatr Surg. 1983 Oct;18(5):634-5
    1. Pediatr Nurs. 1983 Nov-Dec;9(6):424-5
    1. J Pediatr. 1984 Apr;104(4):596-9
    1. Aust Paediatr J. 1981 Jun;17(2):93-4
    1. J Pediatr. 1981 Aug;99(2):231-3
    1. J Appl Physiol. 1974 Mar;36(3):333-6
    1. Lancet. 1969 Oct 11;2(7624):805-6

Source: PubMed

3
Sottoscrivi