<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!DOCTYPE article  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v3.0 20080202//EN" "http://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/3.0/journalpublishing3.dtd"><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" dtd-version="3.0" xml:lang="en" article-type="research article"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">OJPed</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Open Journal of Pediatrics</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2160-8741</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Scientific Research Publishing</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4236/ojped.2018.84031</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">OJPed-88491</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="Discipline-v2"><subject>Medicine&amp;Healthcare</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>
 
 
  Comparative Thermometery in Paediatric Age Group: Is the Non-Touch Infrared Thermometer (NTIT) Reading Comparable to Regular Mercury-in-Glass Thermometer (MIGT) Reading?
 
</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Yetunde</surname><given-names>Olasinde</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Moninuola</surname><given-names>Ernest</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Gbenga</surname><given-names>Popoola</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Kolade</surname><given-names>Ernest</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref><xref ref-type="corresp" rid="cor1"><sup>*</sup></xref></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="aff1"><addr-line>Department of Paediatrics, University of Ilorin Teaching Hospital, Ilorin, Nigeria</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff2"><addr-line>Department of Dental Surgery, University of Ilorin Teaching Hospital, Ilorin, Nigeria</addr-line></aff><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>14</day><month>11</month><year>2018</year></pub-date><volume>08</volume><issue>04</issue><fpage>303</fpage><lpage>310</lpage><history><date date-type="received"><day>30,</day>	<month>August</month>	<year>2018</year></date><date date-type="rev-recd"><day>12,</day>	<month>November</month>	<year>2018</year>	</date><date date-type="accepted"><day>15,</day>	<month>November</month>	<year>2018</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>&#169; Copyright  2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. </copyright-statement><copyright-year>2014</copyright-year><license><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</license-p></license></permissions><abstract><p>
 
 
  Background:
   
  Accurate temperature measurement is a critical step in evaluating health or disease especially in children and immmunocompromised
   subjects; inaccurate measurement may lead to improper diagnosis, wrong treatment or inappropriate intervention. Several methods of temperature
   
  measurements exist and comparing these gives room for choosing a near ideal method in terms of speed, safety and accuracy. The study aimed to compare the forehead non touch infra-red thermometer with the axilllary mercury-in-glass method of temperature measurement in the Paediatric age-group. <b>Methods:</b>
  <b> </b>
  Study was given ethical approval as part of a larger study. Four hundred and thirty seven children aged 1 to 24 months were studied at the well-baby/immunizationclinic of the University of Ilorin Teaching Hospital over a 6-months period. Both non-touch infrared and theregular 
  mercury-in-glass thermometers were used to take the body temperatures.
   
  Data were analysed with SPSS version 21. Pearson correlation was used to determine the relationship between the two methods of temperature measurements, while Bland-Altman method was used to test for level of agreement between them. <b>Results:</b>
  <b> </b>
  The 
  mean age and SD was 5.81 &#177; 4.04 months. Pearson correlation showed a positive
   
  correlation between the 
  axillary mercury-in-glass and forehead non-touch infra-red thermometry
   readings (r = 0.281, <b>p &lt; 0.001</b>). Also, Bland-Altman method revealed 
  a good agreement between both methods of thermometry as 96% of the readings were within the limits of agreement. Mean difference was 0.09&#176;
  C
   (
  95% confidence interval 0.05 - 0.13). 
  <b>Conclusion:</b>
   Axillary mercury-in-glass thermomete
  r and forehead non touch infra-red thermometers have a good agreement and can be used interchangeably.
 
</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>Axillary Mercury-in-Glass Thermometer</kwd><kwd> Forehead Non-Touch Infra-Red Thermometer</kwd><kwd> Bland-Altman</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><body><sec id="s1"><title>1. Introduction</title><p>Evaluation of body temperature is one of the oldest and most important step in the diagnosis of disease [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.88491-ref1">1</xref>] . Accurate temperature measurement is thus a critical step in evaluating health or disease especially in children and immmunocompromised subjects [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.88491-ref1">1</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.88491-ref2">2</xref>] . Inaccurate measurement may lead to improper diagnosis, wrong treatment or inappropriate intervention [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.88491-ref2">2</xref>] .</p><p>The temperature measured depends on the site and type of thermometer used. The most reliable means of temperature measurement is the core temperature, which is best taken at the pulmonary artery (site closest to the thermoregulatory center) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.88491-ref1">1</xref>] . Other sites for taking core temperature are the bladder, tympanic membrane, oesophagus, nasopharynx and trachea [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.88491-ref1">1</xref>] . However these methods are invasive and not routinely feasible.</p><p>The Axilla, rectum and oral cavity are traditionally used to take temperatures in babies [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.88491-ref3">3</xref>] Rectal thermometry is slightly invasive and poorly tolerated by children while the oral is painful, and uncomfortable, not recommended for use in patients with oral surgery, newborns or uncooperative and unconscious patients [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.88491-ref4">4</xref>] Readings are also affected by consumption of hot or cold foods [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.88491-ref4">4</xref>] .</p><p>Types of thermometers include electronic contact thermometers, chemical thermometers, infrared thermometers and mercury-in-glass thermometers. Mercury-in-glass thermometers (MIGT) are no longer used in the developed world because of the risk of mercury contamination and poisoning.</p><p>Non touch infra-red thermometers (NTIT) are newer and measure body temperature via infrared emission from the body [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.88491-ref4">4</xref>] . They are non-invasive, convenient and easier to use [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.88491-ref2">2</xref>] The risk of transmission of infections is minimized with NTIT especially in the paediatric age-group in whom minimal touch and infection control is very important [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.88491-ref1">1</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.88491-ref2">2</xref>] .</p><p>Several studies have compared body temperatures using different thermometers [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.88491-ref3">3</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.88491-ref4">4</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.88491-ref5">5</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.88491-ref6">6</xref>] . While Gasim et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.88491-ref5">5</xref>] and Edelu et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.88491-ref3">3</xref>] reported that infrared tympanic thermometers were as reliable and accurate as axillary mercury-in-glass thermometers in subjects studied. Yetman et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.88491-ref6">6</xref>] reported that temperatures obtained with infrared tympanic membrane thermometers did not accurately reflect an infant’s rectal or axillary temperatures. Similarly, Basak et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.88491-ref4">4</xref>] reported a weak correlation between temperatures taken with NTIT and chemical or tympanic membrane thermometers. On the other hand, Abdulkadir et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.88491-ref7">7</xref>] reported that infrared tympanic thermometry readings in febrile children better reflected rectal temperature than axillary temperature. None of these studies has actually compared thermometry readings from forehead NTIT and MIGT in the Paediatric age group. This study aims to compare this with the aim of suggesting a faster, more reliable and convenient means of taking temperature in children.</p></sec><sec id="s2"><title>2. Method</title><p>Subject recruitment was carried out by the Researcher and two research assistants who had been duly trained by the Researcher after an Ethical clearance was obtained as part of a larger Poliomylitis Vaccine Trial from the University of Iloin Teaching Hospital Ethics and Research Committee. Inclusion criterial included: well baby with, aged 1 to 24 months, and consent given.All children that met the inclussion criteria were recruited over a six months period (between September 2016 and February 2017). After a clear explaination had been given to the mother/caregiver, a study proforma was administered in an interview form to obtain relevant socio-demographic features such as age of the baby, social class and immunisation history. A brief physical examination was also carried out on the babies. The elligible babies and their mothers were made to sit in the same room with a constant room temperature. Temperature of babies were taken thus:</p><p>Using the NTIT: The NTIT was held at a maximum distance of 5 cm from the midpoint of the forehead area until the signal tone was heard (average of 1 - 2 secs). Temparatures were taken 3 times and the average reading calculated and recorded.</p><p>Using the MIGT: The MIGT was cleaned with alcohol swab and shaken before each use, to drop the mercury column to below 35˚C and placed in the axilla for 3 - 5 minutes before the reading was taken. One reading was taken for each patient. The MIGT was then cleaned again with an alcohol swab.</p></sec><sec id="s3"><title>3. Data Analysis</title><p>Data were entered into a computer and analysed with SPSS version 21.</p><p>Pearson correlation was used to determine the relationship between the two methods of temperature measurements, while Bland-Altmanmethod was used to test for level of agreement between them.Level of agreement was said to be good as if 95% of the data laid between 1.96 SD of the mean difference between the two methods [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.88491-ref8">8</xref>] . According to previous studies, mean of difference was considered good if &lt;0.5˚C, and satisfactory if &lt;0.6˚C [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.88491-ref9">9</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.88491-ref10">10</xref>] .</p></sec><sec id="s4"><title>4. Results</title><p>A total of Four hundred and thirty-seven (437) children were recruited from the Immunisation clinic of UITH, Amilegbe Ilorin. They were aged 1 to 24 months. The mean age and SD was 5.81 &#177; 4.04 months. Almost Fifty-four percent (53.8%) of the children were males, while 46.2% were females. The mean birth weight was 3.23 kg. While 74.1% of the children were born in a hospital, 9.8% of them were born at home.</p><p>The other socio-demographic variables are as shown in <xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref> and <xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref>.</p><p>Concerning the immunization status, 94.1% of the babies had immunization at birth, 92% had gone for the 6-week immunization visit (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref>).</p><p>Not applicable were infants who were not old enough for the respective Vaccines.</p><p>The average temperatures obtained were 36.5˚C &#177; 0.30˚C for NTIT and 36.59˚C &#177; 0.44˚C for MGIT (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table4">Table 4</xref>).</p><p>Using the Pearson correlation technique, there was apositive relationship between the two methods of temperature measurements. (r = 0.281, p &lt; 0.001) Further details are as shown in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>.</p><p>The Bland-Altman plot showed good agreement between the two methods as 96.8% (423/437) of the paired differences in the readings fell within the limit of agreement as shown in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>. Furthermore, the width of agreement was narrow (1.7791) with a lower limit of −0.8107 (95% CI, −0.8845 to −0.7369) and an upper limit of 0.9884 (95% CI, 0.9146 to 1.0623). Further details are shown in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>.</p><table-wrap id="table1" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref></label><caption><title> Socio-demographic variables of the study population</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Variable</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Frequency (N = 437)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Percent</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Age (in months)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Mean &#177; SD</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >5.81 &#177; 4.04</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Range</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >1.00 - 24.00</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Sex</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Male</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >235</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >53.8</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Female</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >202</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46.2</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Birth weight (Kg)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Mean &#177; SD</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >3.23 &#177; 0.69</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Place of birth</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Home</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >43</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9.8</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Traditional birth</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >21</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.8</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Mission home</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >45</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10.3</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Hospital</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >324</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >74.1</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Others</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.9</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Social class</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Class I</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >122</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >27.9</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Class II</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >201</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46.0</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Class III</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >86</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >19.7</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Class IV</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >28</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.4</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Class V</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><table-wrap id="table2" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref></label><caption><title> Schema of social classification [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.88491-ref12">12</xref>] </title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Social Class</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Profession</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Educational Attainment</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >I</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Professional, Senior public servants, Owners of large business concerns, Senior military officers, large scale contractors</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >University graduates or equivalents</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >II</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Non-academic professionals e.g. Nurses, Secondary school teachers, Secretaries, Owners of medium sized business. Intermediate grade public servants</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >School certificate holders and equivalent</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >III</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Non manual skilled workers including clerks, typists, telephone operators, Junior school teachers, Drivers</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Grade II teachers or equivalent</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >IV</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Petty traders, Laborers, Messengers</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Primary certificate</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >V</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Unemployed, Full time house wives, Students, Subsistence farmers</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >No formal education</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><table-wrap id="table3" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref></label><caption><title> Frequency of illness, use of antipyretics and immunizations of children</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Variable</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Frequency (N = 437)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Percent</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Illness in last 48 hours</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Yes</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >52</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11.9</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >No</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >385</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >88.1</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Use of antipyretic drug</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Yes</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >162</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >37.1</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >No</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >275</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >62.9</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Immunization</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >At birth</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Yes</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >411</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >94.1</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >No</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >26</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.9</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >6 weeks</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Yes</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >402</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >92.0</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >No</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.0</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Not applicable</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >22</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.0</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >10 weeks</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Yes</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >359</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >82.2</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >No</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >25</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.7</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Not applicable</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >53</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >12.1</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >14 weeks</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Yes</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >294</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >67.3</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >No</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >41</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9.4</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Not applicable</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >102</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >23.3</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >9 months</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Yes</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >102</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >23.3</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >No</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >110</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >25.2</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Not applicable</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >225</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >51.5</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><table-wrap id="table4" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table4">Table 4</xref></label><caption><title> Mean temperature measurement</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Variable</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Mean &#177; SD</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >NTIT Temperature reading</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >36.50 &#177; 0.30</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Axillary Temperature (MGIT reading)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >36.59 &#177; 0.44</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap></sec><sec id="s5"><title>5. Discussion</title><p>The mean axillary temperature of 36.59˚C &#177; 0.44˚C for MGIT and 36.5˚C &#177; 0.30˚C for NTIT in this study was similar to 36.82˚C &#177; 0.44˚C and 36.40˚C &#177; 0.42˚C reported by Sollai et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.88491-ref9">9</xref>] , but much lower than the 37.18˚C &#177; 0.96 ˚C and 37.30˚C &#177; 0.92 ˚C reported by Chiapinni et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.88491-ref11">11</xref>] . The reason for this disparity might be due to the fact that the current study recruited children from an immunization (well-baby) clinic while Chiapinni et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.88491-ref11">11</xref>] recruited patients from the Emergency unit. This is similar to the findings of Chiapinni et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.88491-ref11">11</xref>] .</p><p>The current study finding of a positive correlation between NTIT and MGIT is consistent with the findings of Gasim et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.88491-ref5">5</xref>] and Edelu et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.88491-ref3">3</xref>] . This demonstrates a linear relationship between the temperature readings by both methods and implies that one method can be used in place of the other. The finding of a good agreement between the two thermometers is consistent with the reports of Sollai et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.88491-ref9">9</xref>] and Chiapinni et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.88491-ref11">11</xref>] ; but contrary to Sethi et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.88491-ref10">10</xref>] and Basak et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.88491-ref4">4</xref>] who reported no agreement between infra-red thermometers and mercury thermometers. The difference could have been due to the fact that while the current research studied older children who were healthy, Sethi et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.88491-ref10">10</xref>] studied the sick neonates admitted in the intensive care unit.</p><p>Edelu et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.88491-ref3">3</xref>] , although reported a positive correlation between the two methods of measurements, found no agreement between them. The disparity in the two studies may however be due to the fact that Edelu et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.88491-ref3">3</xref>] used the infra-red tympanic thermometer in the oral mode; meaning the tympanic temperature reading was converted to an approximate oral temperature reading. This process of conversion may have altered the sensitivity. Also, rectal temperature was compared with the oral temperature as against forehead and axillary temperatures used in the current study.</p></sec><sec id="s6"><title>6. Conclusion</title><p>MIGT and forehead NTIT had a good positive correlation and a good agreement.</p></sec><sec id="s7"><title>Recommendation</title><p>For speed and convenience as well as hygiene and infection control, MGIT can be safely replaced by forehead NTIT in clinical Paediatric practice. Also use of MIGT can be discontinued to reduce the concerns about environmental mercury pollution.</p></sec><sec id="s8"><title>Limitation of the Study</title><p>The neonatal age group was not included in the study. Also, Tympanic temperature, which is a better estimate of the core temperature was not done in this study and may be a line of future research in healthy children.</p></sec><sec id="s9"><title>Funding</title><p>No specific Grants available for this work.</p></sec><sec id="s10"><title>Conflicts of Interest</title><p>The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.</p></sec><sec id="s11"><title>Cite this paper</title><p>Olasinde, Y., Ernest, M., Popoola, G. and Ernest, K. (2018) Comparative Thermometery in Paediatric Age Group: Is the Non-Touch Infrared Thermometer (NTIT) Reading Comparable to Regular Mercury-in-Glass Thermometer (MIGT) Reading? Open Journal of Pediatrics, 8, 303-310. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojped.2018.84031</p></sec></body><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="scirp.88491-ref1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Thye, S.L., Sabirin, J. and Bakri, R. (2012) Infrared Thermometer. Ministry of Health, Putrajaya.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.88491-ref2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">National Institute for Health Research (2015) Non-Contact Infrared Thermometers. Diagnostic Evidence Co-Operative. 
https://www.community.healthcare.mic.nihr.ac.uk/reports-and-resources/reports-0025.pdf</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.88491-ref3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Edelu, B.O., Ojinnaka, N.C. and Ikefuna, A.N. (2011) Fever Detection in under 5 Children in a Tertiary Health Facility Using the Infrared Tympanic Thermometer in the Oral Mode. Italian Journal of Pediatrics, 37, 8.  
https://doi.org/10.1186/1824-7288-37-8</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.88491-ref4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Basak, T., Aciksoz, S., Tosun, B., Akyuz, A. and Acikel, C. (2013) Comparison of Three Different Thermometers in Evaluating the Body Temperature of Healthy Young Adult Individuals. International Journal of Nursing Practice, 19, 471-478.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.88491-ref5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Gasim, G.I., Musa, I.R., Abdien, M.T. and Adam I. (2013) Accuracy of Tympanic Temperature Measurement Using an Infrared Tympanic Membrane Thermometer. BMC Research Notes, 6, 194. https://doi.org/10.1186/1756-0500-6-194</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.88491-ref6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Yetman, R.J., Coody, D.K., West, M.S. and Brown, M. (1993) Comparison of Temperature Measurements by an Aural Infrared Thermometer with Measurements by Traditional Rectal and Axillary Techniques. Journal of Pediatrics, 122, 769-773.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3476(06)80024-7</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.88491-ref7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Abdulkadir, M. and Johnson, W. (2013) A Comparative Study of Rectal, Tympanic and Axillary Thermometry in Febrile Children under 5 Years of Age in Nigeria. Paediatrics and International Child Health, 33, 165-159.  
https://doi.org/10.1179/2046905513Y.0000000066</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.88491-ref8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Bland, J.M. and Altman, D.G. (1999) Measuring Agreement in Method Comparison Studies. Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 8, 135-160.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.88491-ref9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Sollai, S., Dani, C., Berti, E., Fancelli, C., Galli, L., de Martino, M., et al. (2016) Performance of a Non-Contact Infrared Thermometer in Healthy Newborns. BMJ Open, 6, e008695.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.88491-ref10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Sethi, A., Patel, D., Nimbalkar, A., Phatak, A. and Nimbalkar, S. (2013) Comparison of Forehead Infrared Thermometry with Axillary Digital thermometry in Neonates. Indian Pediatrics, 50, 1153-1154. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13312-013-0302-y</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.88491-ref11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Chiappini, E., Sollai, S., Longhi, R., Morandini, L., Laghi, A., Emilia Osio, C., et al. (2011) Perfomance of Non-Contact Infrared Thermometer for Detecting Febrile Children in Hospital and Ambulatory Settings. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 20, 1311-1318. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2010.03565.x</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.88491-ref12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Oyedeji</surname><given-names> G. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>1985</year>)<article-title>Socio-Economic and Cultural Background of the Hospitalized Children in Ilesha</article-title><source> Nigerian Journal of Paediatrics</source><volume> 12</volume>,<fpage> 111</fpage>-<lpage>117</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi"></pub-id></mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>