Literature DB >> 15711462

Clinical evaluation of the new TGDc-01 "PRA" palpebral tonometer: comparison with contact and non-contact tonometry.

Carlos García Resúa1, Maria J Giráldez Fernández, Alejandro Cerviño Expósito, Javier González Pérez, Eva Yebra-Pimentel.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The TGDc-01 "PRA" (Ryazan State Instrument, Ryazan, Russia) tonometer is a new portable small-sized tonometer that measures intraocular pressure (IOP) through the eyelid. The purpose of this study is to assess the repeatability of the TGDc-01 IOP measurements by comparing them against those obtained with Goldmann tonometer and with those from Perkins applanation tonometer, Xpert (Reichert, Depew, NY) noncontact tonometer, and Tono-Pen XL (Medtronic Solan, Jacksonville, FL) digital tonometer.
METHODS: Fifty-eight right eyes of 58 young subjects were measured with each of the tonometers. Noncontact tonometry was performed first, followed by Goldmann and Perkins applanation tonometer (in random order), digital Tono-Pen XL, and finally TGDc-01 tonometer (sitting and supine position). Correlation analysis was used to evaluate the relationship between the Goldmann tonometer and the remaining tonometers used in this study. Plotting the difference between the methods against mean was also done to compare the tonometers. The hypothesis of zero bias was examined by a paired t-test. The 95% limits of agreement (LoA) were also calculated.
RESULTS: TGDc-01 showed no statistical difference between the IOP measurements obtained in sitting and supine positions. A poor relationship between the TGDc-01 and Goldmann tonometer was found (r = 0.173; p = 0.001). Although the mean differences between Goldmann and Tonopen XL, Xpert, and TGDc-01 IOP measurements were statistically significant, the wider 95% LoA was observed when comparing the Goldmann and TGDc-01 tonometers. Computation of the 95% LoA resulted in a wide bias range when comparing the TGDc-01 with all the tonometers used in this study.
CONCLUSIONS: The TGDc-01 "PRA" tonometer was not comparable with the other techniques used in the study. The wide dispersion range of the values obtained shows low repeatability of the TGDc-01 for screening purposes. These results could be because of the technique of measurement and/or interindividual variables.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15711462     DOI: 10.1097/01.opx.0000153164.51951.58

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Optom Vis Sci        ISSN: 1040-5488            Impact factor:   1.973


  5 in total

Review 1.  Rebound tonometry: new opportunities and limitations of non-invasive determination of intraocular pressure.

Authors:  A Cervino
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 4.638

2.  Comparison of rebound tonometry with Goldmann applanation tonometry and correlation with central corneal thickness.

Authors:  M E Iliev; D Goldblum; K Katsoulis; C Amstutz; B Frueh
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2006-05-03       Impact factor: 4.638

3.  Central corneal thickness and Diaton transpalpebral tonometry.

Authors:  Mustafa Ilker Toker; Ayse Vural; Haydar Erdogan; Aysen Topalkara; Mustafa Kemal Arici
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2008-02-20       Impact factor: 3.117

Review 4.  An overview of home tonometry and telemetry for intraocular pressure monitoring in humans.

Authors:  Edward Yung; Valerie Trubnik; L Jay Katz
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2014-05-29       Impact factor: 3.117

5.  Comparison of intraocular pressure as measured by three different non-contact tonometers and goldmann applanation tonometer for non-glaucomatous subjects.

Authors:  Seung Pil Bang; Chong Eun Lee; Yu Cheol Kim
Journal:  BMC Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-11-02       Impact factor: 2.209

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.