Literature DB >> 19787598

Comparison of ICare, dynamic contour tonometer, and ocular response analyzer with Goldmann applanation tonometer in patients with glaucoma.

Evelien Vandewalle1, Sofie Vandenbroeck, Ingeborg Stalmans, Thierry Zeyen.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare the intraocular pressure (IOP) readings taken by ICare, Pascal dynamic contour tonometer (DCT), and ocular response analyzer (ORA) with those taken by Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT). We sought to evaluate the influence of central corneal thickness (CCT) on IOP measurements and to compare patients' preferences for the four tonometers.
METHODS: In this prospective study, 93 eyes from 93 patients were examined. Patients were randomly divided into 4 groups to vary the order in which the tonometers were applied. CCT was measured with an ultrasound pachymeter.
RESULTS: The average CCT was 558+/-47.4 microm. The mean +/- standard deviation IOP for GAT, ICare, DCT, and ORA (Goldmann-correlated IOP) (ORA(GC)) were 15.1+/-4.8, 15.7+/-5.7, 18.2+/-5.1, and 18.3+/-6.6 mmHg, respectively. There was no significant difference between the mean IOP obtained with GAT and ICare (p=0.14). There was also no difference in IOP levels between the mean IOP obtained with DCT and ORA (p=0.26). There was no correlation between IOP measurements and CCT for the 4 instruments. Bland-Altman graphs showed disagreement between the measurements taken by GAT and the other instruments. There was no significant difference in patients' preference among the 4 instruments (p=0.48).
CONCLUSIONS: IOP readings from ICare were consistent with those from GAT, whereas DCT readings correspond well to ORA(GC) measurements. DCT and ORA readings both overestimated the GAT readings. There was no correlation between the IOP measurements and the CCT for the 4 instruments. There was no significant difference in patients' preference among the 4 instruments.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19787598     DOI: 10.1177/112067210901900516

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Ophthalmol        ISSN: 1120-6721            Impact factor:   2.597


  14 in total

1.  Evaluation of the Icare-ONE rebound tonometer as a self-measuring intraocular pressure device in normal subjects.

Authors:  Ioannis Halkiadakis; Aimilianos Stratos; George Stergiopoulos; Eleni Patsea; Sotiris Skouriotis; Panagiotis Mitropoulos; Dimitrios Papaconstantinou; Gerasimos Georgopoulos
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 3.117

2.  IOP agreement between I-Care TA01 rebound tonometer and the Goldmann applanation tonometer in eyes with and without glaucoma.

Authors:  Gautam Sinha; Shikha Gupta; Shreyas Temkar; Veena Pandey; Ramanjit Sihota; Tanuj Dada
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  2014-12-16       Impact factor: 2.031

3.  Comparison of ICare and IOPen vs Goldmann applanation tonometry according to international standards 8612 in glaucoma patients.

Authors:  Milena Pahlitzsch; Jeanette Brünner; Johannes Gonnermann; Anna-Karina B Maier; Necip Torun; Eckart Bertelmann; Matthias Kj Klamann
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2016-11-18       Impact factor: 1.779

4.  Accommodation-induced intraocular pressure changes in progressing myopes and emmetropes.

Authors:  L Yan; L Huibin; L Xuemin
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2014-09-05       Impact factor: 3.775

5.  Changes in corneal biomechanics and intraocular pressure following Femto-LASIK using Goldman applanation tonometry and ocular response analyzer.

Authors:  Ahmed Yassin Hemida; Omar M Said; Asser A E Abdel-Meguid; Mohammed Iqbal; Amani E Badawi
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-05-18       Impact factor: 1.779

6.  The relationship between corneal hysteresis and the magnitude of intraocular pressure reduction with topical prostaglandin therapy.

Authors:  Daniel R Agarwal; Joshua R Ehrlich; Mitsugu Shimmyo; Nathan M Radcliffe
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2011-03-24       Impact factor: 4.638

7.  Intraocular Pressure Changes during Accommodation in Progressing Myopes, Stable Myopes and Emmetropes.

Authors:  Yan Liu; Huibin Lv; Xiaodan Jiang; Xiaodan Hu; Mingzhou Zhang; Xuemin Li
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-10-30       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Comparison of different intraocular pressure measurement techniques in normal eyes, post surface and post lamellar refractive surgery.

Authors:  Shireen Ma Shousha; Mahmoud Ah Abo Steit; Mohamed Hm Hosny; Wael A Ewais; Ahmad Mm Shalaby
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2013-01-08

9.  Applanation tonometry: a comparison of the Perkins handheld and Goldmann slit lamp-mounted methods.

Authors:  R Arora; H Bellamy; Mw Austin
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2014-03-26

Review 10.  Ageing and ocular surface immunity.

Authors:  Alireza Mashaghi; Jiaxu Hong; Sunil K Chauhan; Reza Dana
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2016-07-04       Impact factor: 4.638

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.