Naturally the NP never mentioned it b/c he *wasn't sick*...although I'd be *very* reluctant to agree to a rectal temp even if he was sick. I didn't say anything to the NP b/c she's brand new to the practice and we had other things to discuss with her. However, I'm an RN, I work with newborns, I know you can get an accurate enough temp under the arm. A rectal temp is invasive and unecessary IMO. I would expect this argument at the ER, but in the doctor's office?!? I guess this is mostly a rant, but I also want to know:
when you take you dc to the doc for anything other than a WBV, how do they take the temp?
any references on why rectal temps are NOT necessary...I'd like to send some literature to the office
Laura wife to Chris proud mommy to our lil monkey (c-section 6-10-06), our other lil monkey (HBAC 3-08-09) Our next and last son (due by HBAC mid July 2011) and our angel (10-03-04). My middle son has many severe food allergies.
The only time I EVER used a rectal temp on my DS was when he had a temp on our ear reader of 105 and I called the nurse line to determine if I needed to take him to the ER at 3am. She suggested a more accurate reading (rectal) and close monitoring.... But for a routine visit in a non-very-ill child I can't imagine why they'd even want to go there, KWIM?
The only way I will ever consent to a rectal temp is if he is sick enough that they really do need a perfectly accurate temp.
Mom to my little super hero (02/06) and our super hero-in-training (11/11).