• Salvatore L Cutuli, Eduardo A Osawa, Neil J Glassford, David Marshall, Christopher T Eyeington, Glenn M Eastwood, Paul J Young, and Rinaldo Bellomo.
• Department of Intensive Care, Austin Health, Melbourne, Vic, Australia. sl.cutuli@gmail.com.
• Crit Care Resusc. 2018 Sep 1; 20 (3): 241-244.

ObjectiveIn Australian and New Zealand (ANZ) intensive care units (ICUs), the preferred measurement methods and targets for temperature remain uncertain, but are crucial for future interventional studies. We aimed to investigate the reported use of temperature measurement methods and targets in ANZ ICUs.Design, Settings And ParticipantsStructured online questionnaire delivered via the email list of the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Clinical Trials Group.Main Outcome MeasuresMeasurements methods and targets for temperature in ANZ ICUs.ResultsOf 209 respondents, 130 were nurses (62.2%) and 79 were doctors (37.8%). Only 21.5% of the respondents reported having a unit protocol for measuring body temperature. However, invasive temperature measurement methods were preferred by doctors (69.8% v 55.3%) and non-invasive methods by nurses (29.9% v 44.2%). Moreover, among non-invasive methods, tympanic measurement was preferred by doctors (66.0% v 26.9%) and axillary by nurses (11.7% v 51.9%). Both professions reported a wide range of temperature thresholds that they believed required cooling interventions, but 16.7% of doctors and 42.4% of nurses reported that, in patients with cardiac arrest, they would actively cool patients only if the temperature was ≥ 38°C.ConclusionIn ANZ ICUs, preferred temperature measurement methods and targets are typically not governed by protocol, vary greatly and differ between doctors and nurses. Targeted temperature management after cardiac arrest is not fully established. Future studies of the comparative accuracy of non-invasive temperature measurements methods and practice in patients with cardiac arrest appear important.

16 keywords...

hide…