Clinical accuracy of infrared temperature measurement devices: a comparison against non-invasive core-body temperature

During the coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the implementation of non-contact infrared thermometry (NCIT) became an increasingly popular method of screening body temperature. However, data on the accuracy of these devices and the standardisation of their use are limited. In the current study, the body temperature of non-febrile volunteers was measured using infrared (IR) thermography, IR tympanic ther-mometry and IR gun thermometry at different facial feature locations and distances and compared with SpotOn core-body temperature. Poor agreement was found between all IR devices and SpotOn measurements (intra-class correlation coefficient <0.8). Bland-Alman analysis showed the narrowest limits of agreement with the IR gun at 3 cm from the forehead (bias = 0.19 degrees C, limits of agreement (LOA): -0.58 degrees C to 0.97 degrees C) and widest with the IR gun at the nose (bias = 1.40 degrees C, LOA: -1.15 degrees C to 3.94 degrees C). Thus, our findings challenge the established use of IR thermometry devices within hospital settings without adequate standard operating procedures to reduce operator error.

Automated summary

During the COVID-19 pandemic, non-contact infrared thermometry (NCIT) was widely used for body temperature screening. However, limited data and standardisation existed regarding the accuracy of these devices. This study compared the measurements from infrared (IR) thermography, IR tympanic thermometry, and IR gun thermometry with SpotOn core-body temperature, and found poor agreement between all IR devices and SpotOn measurements.