BACKGROUND: This study aimed to compare the results of newer tonometric techniques with standard tonometry for the examples of the Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT), the indentation tonometer "TGDc-01" and the non-contact tonometer "PT 100". PATIENTS: The study was conducted on a total of 52 healthy subjects. The IOP was measured in each subject on both eyes with all three methods. There were 27 males (51.9 %), 25 females (48.1 %) with an average age of 28.5 years, with a minimum of 13 and a maximum of 79 years. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference between the non-contact and the Goldmann applanation tonometry. The measurements were 0.4 mmHg lower, no difference for the left or right side was seen. For IOP higher than 15 mmHg - 0.88 mmHg lower and for IOP lower 15 mmHg - 0.15 mmHg. The results for the "TGDc01" were 0.82 mmHg lower than GAT, the standard deviation was a little higher with 2.9 mmHg compared to 2.67 mmHg for GAT. For IOP higher than 15 mmHg they rose up to - 2.28 mmHg, for IOP lower than 15 mmHg the results for "TGDc-01" were only - 0.2 mmHg lower. There was also an effect with respect to the side, on the right eye the difference was significant with 3.03 mmHg (p = 0.006), in contrast to the left eye with 2.69 mmHg (p = 0.235). For "TGDc01" the standard deviation was higher with 2.9 mmHg compared to 2.6 mmHg for "PT 100". CONCLUSIONS: The non-contact tonometer showed no clinical relevant difference compared with GAT for measuring IOP. The indentation tonometer showed differences for precision, for higher tension IOP the measurement was lower compared with GAT. There was also a significant side difference using the "TGDc-01".
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to compare the results of newer tonometric techniques with standard tonometry for the examples of the Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT), the indentation tonometer "TGDc-01" and the non-contact tonometer "PT 100". PATIENTS: The study was conducted on a total of 52 healthy subjects. The IOP was measured in each subject on both eyes with all three methods. There were 27 males (51.9 %), 25 females (48.1 %) with an average age of 28.5 years, with a minimum of 13 and a maximum of 79 years. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference between the non-contact and the Goldmann applanation tonometry. The measurements were 0.4 mmHg lower, no difference for the left or right side was seen. For IOP higher than 15 mmHg - 0.88 mmHg lower and for IOP lower 15 mmHg - 0.15 mmHg. The results for the "TGDc01" were 0.82 mmHg lower than GAT, the standard deviation was a little higher with 2.9 mmHg compared to 2.67 mmHg for GAT. For IOP higher than 15 mmHg they rose up to - 2.28 mmHg, for IOP lower than 15 mmHg the results for "TGDc-01" were only - 0.2 mmHg lower. There was also an effect with respect to the side, on the right eye the difference was significant with 3.03 mmHg (p = 0.006), in contrast to the left eye with 2.69 mmHg (p = 0.235). For "TGDc01" the standard deviation was higher with 2.9 mmHg compared to 2.6 mmHg for "PT 100". CONCLUSIONS: The non-contact tonometer showed no clinical relevant difference compared with GAT for measuring IOP. The indentation tonometer showed differences for precision, for higher tension IOP the measurement was lower compared with GAT. There was also a significant side difference using the "TGDc-01".
Authors: Lori M Ventura; Iuri Golubev; William Lee; Izuru Nose; Jean-Marie Parel; William J Feuer; Vittorio Porciatti Journal: J Glaucoma Date: 2013-03 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: Vittorio Porciatti; William J Feuer; Pedro Monsalve; Giacinto Triolo; Luis Vazquez; John McSoley; Lori M Ventura Journal: J Glaucoma Date: 2017-05 Impact factor: 2.503