What type of thermometer to use for 4 yo? - Page 2 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
Old 10-21-2009, 09:23 AM
 
mommy2maya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: SE PA
Posts: 1,314
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by alegna View Post
I would disagree that the actual temp matters as much as how long it lasts and behavior of the child.

-Angela
When my preemie came home from the hospital early, instead of spending time in the nicu, we had a nurse come out daily, to take vitals, take blood samples for bili levels, weigh her, and check her temp. She was actually having a difficult time keeping her temp regulated so we had to take a rectal temp every two hours, and call if it got down below a certain number, which was I think 96.7. I tried everything, lots and lots of layers, with hat and baby mitts, and naked/naked kangaroo type, with a heavy wool blanket over both of us, and neither really worked extraordinarily well. But, point being, I had to keep track of her temp to make sure she was stable and warm. The exact number was very important.
mommy2maya is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 10-21-2009, 10:58 AM
 
alegna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 42,826
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


I would agree that is a special situation. Not at all your typical- what temp is my kid running.

-Angela
alegna is offline  
Old 10-21-2009, 11:08 AM
 
mamazee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: US midwest
Posts: 7,246
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
I've never used a rectal thermometer. I've always used an under-the-arm one, including when they were babies. The one time the temp was high enough to worry, it was obvious my dd needed to go to the hospital regardless of her exact temperature.
mamazee is offline  
Old 10-21-2009, 11:17 AM
 
JL83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 903
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by alegna View Post
I would disagree that the actual temp matters as much as how long it lasts and behavior of the child.

-Angela

So you are saying that Dr Sears is wrong? That the nurses I've talked to at my child's doctor's office are wrong? Each time I've called them and told them her temp, they've reassured me that it's not considered "high" or that since it came down with pain relievers that everything is fine.

If I didn't have an accurate temperature, we would not be able to make good educated decisions about what to do. High fevers in small children can be quite dangerous. They normally aren't. But having the correct information is vital for informed choice.
JL83 is offline  
Old 10-21-2009, 11:24 AM
 
alegna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 42,826
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by JL83 View Post
So you are saying that Dr Sears is wrong? That the nurses I've talked to at my child's doctor's office are wrong? Each time I've called them and told them her temp, they've reassured me that it's not considered "high" or that since it came down with pain relievers that everything is fine.

If I didn't have an accurate temperature, we would not be able to make good educated decisions about what to do. High fevers in small children can be quite dangerous. They normally aren't. But having the correct information is vital for informed choice.
Do you have information showing that "high" fevers in small children can be quite dangerous? What I've seen is that is simply not true. The body does not allow it to proceed to a dangerous level.

I'm saying that Dr. Sears is playing to his audience

http://www.parenting.com/article/Pre...Easing-a-Fever

http://naturalmedicine.suite101.com/...ever_naturally


From:
http://www.ahealthyme.com/topic/childfever#s21
"To damage the brain, a fever has to go as high as 107 or 108 degrees F. This kind of fever is generally the product of heat stroke."

And, from:
http://www.babycenter.com/404_can-a-...amage_11590.bc
"Although fevers over 106 degrees are very unusual, unless a child is trapped in a hot place or overdressed, most children can tolerate a temperature of slightly greater than 107 degrees F without long-term effects from the fever itself."

-Angela
alegna is offline  
Old 10-21-2009, 11:33 AM
 
JL83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 903
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
It feels like you're missing my point.

There are 2 issues at play.

1) Most parents aren't doctors or nurses and will often seek medical attention (phone or office visit) when they encounter an unfamiliar situation with their child. And this is a good thing. Knowing an accurate temperature for your child can be helpful in both NOT ignoring a possibly dangerous fever AND in not overreacting to a harmless minor one. Being able to take an accurate temp on my child has prevented many needless calls to her doctor and/or trips to an after hours clinic. So it works both ways. Also, the first thing the nurse asks when you call up and tell them that your child has a fever is "what's their temp". If you were to tell them you didn't know, I'm sure they'd tell you to bring the kid in. That's most likely to be a waste of everyone's time.

2) High fevers by themselves are very rarely dangerous. However, very quickly rising fevers can be a sign of something serious, like meningitis. In order to determine how quickly a fever is rising (and/or responding to medications) you need to have an accurate way of determining temperature.
JL83 is offline  
Old 10-21-2009, 12:14 PM
 
riverscout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: back where I belong
Posts: 2,260
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by JL83 View Post
It feels like you're missing my point.

There are 2 issues at play.

1) Most parents aren't doctors or nurses and will often seek medical attention (phone or office visit) when they encounter an unfamiliar situation with their child. And this is a good thing. Knowing an accurate temperature for your child can be helpful in both NOT ignoring a possibly dangerous fever AND in not overreacting to a harmless minor one. Being able to take an accurate temp on my child has prevented many needless calls to her doctor and/or trips to an after hours clinic. So it works both ways. Also, the first thing the nurse asks when you call up and tell them that your child has a fever is "what's their temp". If you were to tell them you didn't know, I'm sure they'd tell you to bring the kid in. That's most likely to be a waste of everyone's time.

2) High fevers by themselves are very rarely dangerous. However, very quickly rising fevers can be a sign of something serious, like meningitis. In order to determine how quickly a fever is rising (and/or responding to medications) you need to have an accurate way of determining temperature.

I think you're just being anal.




Just kidding! Sorry, I couldn't resist.

coolshine.gif

riverscout is offline  
Old 10-21-2009, 12:28 PM
 
Jenelle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,481
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I think there are just two types of moms (or more ) going on here. And I'm not saying that one is any better than the other -- just different.

Here's the difference. Some moms have NEVER called their doctor's office to tell them that their child has a fever. So, there is no need for them to have an "exact" number. Some moms are better able to relax and trust their instincts, and just know when something is wrong. Those moms just go ahead and take their child to see a doctor, if it gets to the point that they are truly worried.

So, in the last 8 years with three children, I, personally, have never felt the need to have an "exact" number. I look up symptoms online, I monitor them closely, I bring out the fever-reducing medication if 1) they feel like they are "burning up" or 2) if they are miserable. If at any point I am worried and feel like it is something that may need medical help, then we just go. I have never called and said, "Do you think I should bring him in?" Because when I call, there is no doubt that he's going.

Some of us are also much less trusting of doctors and nurses, after having been through our own experiences in life which change the way we think. I now realize that they are people, just like me, and they make mistakes, and there is human error, and sometimes, (especially with the nurses), they are just plain WRONG. They deal with a lot of people day in and day out, and I don't feel like any of them could possibly know what is going on with my child, better than I do.
Jenelle is offline  
Old 10-21-2009, 01:22 PM
 
JL83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 903
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by riverscout View Post
I think you're just being anal.




Just kidding! Sorry, I couldn't resist.
Well played!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jenelle View Post
I think there are just two types of moms (or more ) going on here. And I'm not saying that one is any better than the other -- just different.

Here's the difference. Some moms have NEVER called their doctor's office to tell them that their child has a fever. So, there is no need for them to have an "exact" number. Some moms are better able to relax and trust their instincts, and just know when something is wrong. Those moms just go ahead and take their child to see a doctor, if it gets to the point that they are truly worried.

So, in the last 8 years with three children, I, personally, have never felt the need to have an "exact" number. I look up symptoms online, I monitor them closely, I bring out the fever-reducing medication if 1) they feel like they are "burning up" or 2) if they are miserable. If at any point I am worried and feel like it is something that may need medical help, then we just go. I have never called and said, "Do you think I should bring him in?" Because when I call, there is no doubt that he's going.

Some of us are also much less trusting of doctors and nurses, after having been through our own experiences in life which change the way we think. I now realize that they are people, just like me, and they make mistakes, and there is human error, and sometimes, (especially with the nurses), they are just plain WRONG. They deal with a lot of people day in and day out, and I don't feel like any of them could possibly know what is going on with my child, better than I do.
I'm really glad that you have a good enough circulation system to be able to accurately judge your child's fever.

I don't. I try. I use my hand and think "she's a little warm" and then I use the thermometer and find out that she actually has a pretty high fever. And other times I feel her head and think she must be burning up (which is confusing because she's not acting like it) and my thermometer then tells me that it's actually only a mild fever (which is more in line with how she's acting).

I've actually only called the doctor once. But I have looked up information online because I didn't know what was "serious" and what wasn't. So owning a thermometer was USEFUL.

Alegna was recommending not owning one at all. I disagree with that advice.
JL83 is offline  
Old 10-21-2009, 11:41 PM
 
alegna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 42,826
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by JL83 View Post

Alegna was recommending not owning one at all. I disagree with that advice.
Actually I wasn't. I own several. I was merely stating that it is rarely imperative to have a highly accurate temp.

-Angela
alegna is offline  
Old 10-22-2009, 02:33 PM
 
mamazee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: US midwest
Posts: 7,246
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Under the arm is about one degree off. If I get a 102 or 103 under the arm, when I call the pediatrician, I say, "Her temperature was 102.6 taken under her arm" and let them interpret that how they wish. I don't see why that isn't accurate enough. Even for when the temp is changing. If it's taken the same way all the time, you should have a pretty good idea of how much it's changing. If it was 99 under the arm 20 minutes ago and is now 102 under the arm, you have plenty of information that the temp is changing quickly.

I do not see why a rectal temp is necessary. I think it would bother a child more than that level of accuracy would warrant.
mamazee is offline  
Old 10-23-2009, 12:55 PM
 
hottmama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,203
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
My littlest will be 4 in December and can hold the thermometer under his tongue and wait for it to beep. We did under the arm with my oldest when he was 4, though. He was less cooperative.
hottmama is offline  
 
User Tag List

Thread Tools


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off