Increasing numbers of people are running with their dogs, particularly in harness through the sport canicross. Additionally, the results suggest that existing equine temperature ranges may need reviewing. The findings of this study suggest that establishing yard specific normal temperature ranges could improve early detection of fever, and support biosecurity protocols in the face of infectious disease outbreaks. The upper limit of the range is lower than most previously suggested temperature ranges, which may reflect the low stress environment in which temperatures were measured horses were housed in a familiar environment and examined and handled by familiar equine technicians. Spearman’s correlation showed no significant correlations between rectal temperature and ambient temperature (Rs = 0.137, p = 0.052), or rectal temperature and horse height (Rs = -0.047, p = 0.791). A Mann Whitney test showed no significant difference between geldings and mares (Z = -1.389, p = 0.165). The normal rectal temperature range of horses on this yard was 36.0 – 38.0☌ (90% confidence interval = 35.97–36.03☌ at the lower limit, CI = 37.97–38.03☌ at the upper limit). Rectal temperature was measured at a depth of 5cm, using lubricated digital predictive thermometers. 652 rectal temperatures were collected from a population of 41 healthy adult horses, including a range of breeds aged 2-23 years old. A yard specific equine rectal temperature reference range was therefore calculated. An inappropriate reference range can negatively affect the interpretation of measurements, resulting in animals being misdiagnosed. Previously published equine temperature ranges often fail to state the population of animals or the method of temperature measurement used to establish the range. The animal specific NCIT devices do not accurately report body temperature in cats or dogs, so their use in clinical situations cannot be recommended. Less than a third of the readings from both NCIT devices reported temperatures within 0.5☌ of rectal temperature (in cats) and ear temperature (in dogs). Ocular surface temperature was measured with each of the NCIT devices and compared with rectal temperature (in cats) or ear temperature (in dogs). To evaluate the accuracy of two animal NCIT devices when compared with rectal temperature in anaesthetised cats, and ear temperatures in exercising dogs.Ģ7 cats undergoing routine neutering under anaesthetic, and 30 dogs competing in cross country races were recruited to the study. There are now animal specific NCIT devices available, however evidence for their use is currently lacking. Non-contact infrared thermometers (NCIT) provide a quick, hands off method of monitoring patients' body temperature. These caveats have yet to be fully addressed in the literature, limiting the options for those seeking alternatives to rectal thermometry. Instrumentation refinement and development, as well as morphologic differences, play an important role in the potential correlation between rectal temperature and these other locations. Here we review evidence on axillary, auricular, and ocular region canine thermometry and the degree to which measurements in these locations are representative of rectal temperature values. Interest in using infra-red thermometry in canines to obtain body temperature has grown as animal scientists and veterinarians search for non-invasive and non-contact methods and locations of obtaining canine temperatures. Rectal temperature remains the standard of obtaining temperature within the clinical setting, but there are many drawbacks with this method, including time, access, animal stress and safety concerns. Body temperature is an important component in the diagnoses and treatment of disease in canines.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |