{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03099510603588907, 'fraction_numerical': 0.03425774877650897, 'mean_word_length': 4.654377880184332, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 2, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
[The ear thermometer; not a good replacement for the rectal thermometer].

OBJECTIVE
To compare the measurements of body temperature with the tympanic infrared thermometer and the digital rectal thermometer.


DESIGN
Prospective, comparative.


SETTING
Beatrix Hospital, Gorinchem, the Netherlands.


PATIENTS AND METHODS
A total of 2057 almost simultaneous measurements of rectal and tympanic temperature were performed in 164 patients in 9 different wards.


RESULTS
The mean difference between the two methods was 0.45 degree C with a standard deviation of 0.57 degree C. The tympanic temperature was lower than the rectal temperature. The differences ranged from -1.5 to 3.6 degrees C. The correlation coefficient was 0.69. If a rectal temperature > 37.8 degrees C was applied as the criterion of fever, the diagnosis was not made in 175/291 measuring moments (60%) with the tympanic thermometer. If a tympanic temperature > 37.8 degrees C was applied as the criterion of fever, the rectal thermometer failed to show fever in 16/132 measuring moments (12%).


CONCLUSION
The low sensitivity of the tympanic measurement to establish fever renders the tympanic infrared thermometer unsuitable for use as a fever thermometer.