Literature DB >> 15864620

Transpalpebral measurement of intraocular pressure using the TGDc-01 tonometer versus standard Goldmann applanation tonometry.

Annette Lösch1, Alexander Scheuerle, Volker Rupp, Gerd Auffarth, Matthias Becker.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A recently developed digital tonometer for transpalpebral intraocular pressure (IOP) measurement, distributed by Corneal, Inc., allows the noninvasive measurement of IOP for screening purposes.
METHOD: We measured the IOP of 218 eyes in 109 patients of the Interdisciplinary Uveitis Center of the University of Heidelberg with intact corneal epithelium. IOPs were measured first with the TGDc-01 tonometer, and then by means of Goldmann tonometry. IOPs were recorded by two independent examiners. The mean of three measurements obtained with the TGDc-01 was taken, whereas only one measurement was performed with the Goldmann tonometer.
RESULTS: The mean difference between the TGDc-01 and Goldmann measurements was 3.7 mmHg. The standard deviation of the differences was +/-4.06 mmHg. Thus measurements acquired with the TGDc-01 may range 4.4 mmHg above or 11.8 mmHg below the values given by Goldmann tonometry.
CONCLUSION: The IOP values obtained with the TGDc-01 were in poor agreement with Goldmann tonometry. We found a higher variation as well as a bias towards lower IOP values with the TGDc-01. It is a question of clinical judgement as to how far these deviating measurements can be accepted for screening purposes. Because the IOPs obtained with the TGDc-01 are generally lower and less accurate than those obtained with the Goldmann tonometer we believe that the TGDc-01 is not a reliable tool for IOP measurement in clinical routine.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15864620     DOI: 10.1007/s00417-004-0971-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol        ISSN: 0721-832X            Impact factor:   3.117


  2 in total

1.  Comparing methods of clinical measurement: reporting standards for bland and altman analysis.

Authors:  S Mantha; M F Roizen; L A Fleisher; R Thisted; J Foss
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 5.108

2.  Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement.

Authors:  J M Bland; D G Altman
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1986-02-08       Impact factor: 79.321

  2 in total
  5 in total

1.  Transpalpebral measurement of intraocular pressure using the Diaton tonometer versus standard Goldmann applanation tonometry.

Authors:  Yuehua Li; Jingming Shi; Xuanchu Duan; Fang Fan
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2010-05-22       Impact factor: 3.117

2.  [Glaucoma attack following Hughes tarsoconjunctival flap: what should be done?].

Authors:  E Bertelmann; N Minko; N Torun
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 1.059

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

4.  Change in intraocular pressure during point-of-care ultrasound.

Authors:  Cameron Berg; Stephanie J Doniger; Brita Zaia; Sarah R Williams
Journal:  West J Emerg Med       Date:  2015-03-06

5.  Comparison of Intraocular Pressure before and after Laser In Situ Keratomileusis Refractive Surgery Measured with Perkins Tonometry, Noncontact Tonometry, and Transpalpebral Tonometry.

Authors:  Isabel Cacho; Juan Sanchez-Naves; Laura Batres; Jesús Pintor; Gonzalo Carracedo
Journal:  J Ophthalmol       Date:  2015-06-08       Impact factor: 1.909

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.