Cargando…

Comparison of Infrared Thermal Detection Systems for mass fever screening in a tropical healthcare setting

OBJECTIVES: Fever screening systems, such as Infrared Thermal Detection Systems (ITDS), have been used for rapid identification of potential cases during respiratory disease outbreaks for public health management. ITDS detect a difference between the subject and ambient temperature, making deploymen...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tay, M.R., Low, Y.L., Zhao, X., Cook, A.R., Lee, V.J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Royal Society for Public Health. Published by Elsevier Ltd. 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7111721/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26296847
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2015.07.023
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVES: Fever screening systems, such as Infrared Thermal Detection Systems (ITDS), have been used for rapid identification of potential cases during respiratory disease outbreaks for public health management. ITDS detect a difference between the subject and ambient temperature, making deployment in hot climates more challenging. This study, conducted in Singapore, a tropical city, evaluates the accuracy of three different ITDS for fever detection compared with traditional oral thermometry and self-reporting in a clinical setting. STUDY DESIGN: This study is a prospective operational evaluation conducted in the Singapore military on all personnel seeking medical care at a high-volume primary healthcare centre over a one week period in February 2014. METHODS: Three ITDS, the STE Infrared Fever Screening System (IFSS), the Omnisense Sentry MKIII and the handheld Quick Shot Infrared Thermoscope HT-F03B, were evaluated. Temperature measurements were taken outside the healthcare centre, under a sheltered walkway and compared to oral temperature. Subjects were asked if they had fever. RESULTS: There were 430 subjects screened, of whom 34 participants (7.9%) had confirmed fever, determined by oral thermometer measurement. The handheld infrared thermoscope had a very low sensitivity (29.4%), but a high specificity (96.8%). The STE ITDS had a moderate sensitivity (44.1%), but a very high specificity (99.1%). Self-reported fevers showed good sensitivity (88.2%) and specificity (93.9%). The sensitivity of the Omnisense ITDS (89.7%) was the highest among the three methods with good specificity (92.0%). CONCLUSION: The new generation Omnisense ITDS displayed a relatively high sensitivity and specificity for fever. Though it has a lower sensitivity, the old generation STE ITDS system showed a very high specificity. Self-reporting of fever was reliable. The handheld thermograph should not be used as a fever-screening tool under tropical conditions.