Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
How ear and rectal temperature compare in dogs with normal, low
By Konietschke, U et al.·Published in Tierarztliche Praxis. Ausgabe K, Kleintiere/Heimtiere·2014·Small Animal Clinic Haar, Germany·View original on PubMed →
PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →
Original publication title: Comparison of auricular and rectal temperature measurement in normothermic, hypothermic, and hyperthermic dogs.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A study found that measuring body temperature in dogs using an ear thermometer (auricular) is not as reliable as using a rectal thermometer, which is the standard method. Researchers compared temperatures in 300 dogs, including those with normal, low, and high body temperatures. While there was some correlation between the two methods, the differences were too large to be clinically acceptable, especially in varying humidity conditions. Therefore, if you need to check your dog's temperature, it's best to stick with the rectal method for accurate results.
People also search for: dog temperature measurement methods · ear thermometer for dogs accuracy · how to take a dog's temperature
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Measurement of rectal temperature is the most common method and considered gold standard for obtaining body temperature in dogs. So far, no study has been performed comparing agreement between rectal and auricular measurements in a large case series. The purpose of the study was to assess agreement between rectal and auricular temperature measurement in normothermic, hypothermic, and hyperthermic dogs with consideration of different environmental conditions and ear conformations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Reference values for both methods were established using 62 healthy dogs. Three hundred dogs with various diseases (220 normothermic, 32 hypothermic, 48 hyperthermic) were enrolled in this prospective study. Rectal temperature was compared to auricular temperature and differences in agreement with regard to environmental temperature, relative humidity, and different ear conformations (pendulous versus prick ears) were evaluated using Pearson's correlation coefficient and Bland-Altman analysis. RESULTS: Correlation between rec- tal and auricular temperature was significant (r: 0.892; p  <  0.01). However, Bland-Altman plots showed an inacceptable variation of values (bias: 0.300 °C; limits of agreement: -0.606 to 1.206 °C). This variation was above a maximal clinical tolerance of 0.3 °C, which was established by experts' opinion (n = 16). Relative humidity had a significant influence (p   =   0.001), whereas environmental temperature did not. CONCLUSION: Variation between the two methods of measuring body temperature was clinically unacceptable. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Although measurement of auricular temperature is fast, simple, and well tolerated, this method provides a clinically unacceptable difference to the rectal measurement.
Find similar cases for your pet
PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.
Search related cases →Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24518943/