Diagnostic accuracy of non-contact infrared thermometers and thermal scanners: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
COVID-19
fever
infection control
influenza
infrared rays
mass screening
pandemics
Journal
Journal of travel medicine
ISSN: 1708-8305
Titre abrégé: J Travel Med
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9434456
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
23 12 2020
23 12 2020
Historique:
received:
21
07
2020
revised:
27
08
2020
accepted:
22
09
2020
pubmed:
13
10
2020
medline:
21
1
2021
entrez:
12
10
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Infrared thermal screening, via the use of handheld non-contact infrared thermometers (NCITs) and thermal scanners, has been widely implemented all over the world. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate its diagnostic accuracy for the detection of fever. We searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, medRxiv, bioRxiv, ClinicalTrials.gov, COVID-19 Open Research Dataset, COVID-19 research database, Epistemonikos, EPPI-Centre, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, Scopus and Web of Science databases for studies where a non-contact infrared device was used to detect fever against a reference standard of conventional thermometers. Forest plots and Hierarchical Summary Receiver Operating Characteristics curves were used to describe the pooled summary estimates of sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic odds ratio. From a total of 1063 results, 30 studies were included in the qualitative synthesis, of which 19 were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.808 (95%CI 0.656-0.903) and 0.920 (95%CI 0.769-0.975), respectively, for the NCITs (using forehead as the site of measurement), and 0.818 (95%CI 0.758-0.866) and 0.923 (95%CI 0.823-0.969), respectively, for thermal scanners. The sensitivity of NCITs increased on use of rectal temperature as the reference. The sensitivity of thermal scanners decreased in a disease outbreak/pandemic setting. Changes approaching statistical significance were also observed on the exclusion of neonates from the analysis. Thermal screening had a low positive predictive value, especially at the initial stage of an outbreak, whereas the negative predictive value (NPV) continued to be high even at later stages. Thermal screening has reasonable diagnostic accuracy in the detection of fever, although it may vary with changes in subject characteristics, setting, index test and the reference standard used. Thermal screening has a good NPV even during a pandemic. The policymakers must take into consideration the factors surrounding the screening strategy while forming ad-hoc guidelines.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33043363
pii: 5920642
doi: 10.1093/jtm/taaa193
pmc: PMC7665626
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
© International Society of Travel Medicine 2020. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.