Literature DB >> 26949614

Comparison of intraocular pressure measurements with different contact tonometers in young healthy persons.

Saulius Galgauskas1, Rasa Strupaite1, Ernesta Strelkauskaite1, Rimvydas Asoklis1.   

Abstract

AIM: To analyze the correlation of Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT), I-Care tonometer and Tono-Pen tonometer results in young healthy persons, and to investigate the influence of central corneal thickness (CCT) on intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements recorded with these tonometers.
METHODS: We conducted a pilot clinical study in 78 eyes of 78 subjects aged 22-28 years old (44 women and 34 men; mean age 23.8±1.19y). IOP was measured using GAT, I-Care and Tono-Pen tonometers, followed by measurements of CCT. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 20.0.
RESULTS: The mean IOPs and standard deviation (±SD) for GAT, I-Care and Tono-Pen were 15.62±2.281 mm Hg, 16.29±2.726 mm Hg and 16.32±2.393 mm Hg, respectively. The mean CCT was 555.15±29.648 µm. Clear positive correlations between GAT and I-Care, GAT and Tono-Pen, and I-Care and Tono-Pen tonometers were found (r=0.867, P<0.001; r=0.861, P<0.001; r=0.915, P<0.001, respectively). In comparison between devices, Bland-Altman analysis showed a significant mean difference (MD) in the measurements by GAT and I-Care of -0.679 mm Hg and by GAT and Tono-Pen of -0.705 mm Hg ( P<0.001), but there was no significant difference between I-Care and Tono-Pen ( P>0.05). Both non-gold standard tonometers were affected by CCT; that is, both I-Care and Tono-Pen tonometer values were significantly higher with higher CCT means (>555 µm; MD=-1.282, P<0.001; MD=-0.949, P<0.001, respectively) compared with GAT.
CONCLUSION: Both I-Care and Tono-Pen tonometers overestimated IOP compared with the GAT values. Either the I-Care or Tono-Pen tonometer could be used instead of GAT because there was no significant difference between their results. Higher CCT values (>555 µm) were associated with overestimated IOP values.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Goldmann tonometer; I-Care tonometer; Tono-Pen tonometer; corneal thickness; intraocular pressure

Year:  2016        PMID: 26949614      PMCID: PMC4768514          DOI: 10.18240/ijo.2016.01.13

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol        ISSN: 2222-3959            Impact factor:   1.779


  27 in total

1.  Precision and accuracy of the ICare tonometer - Peripheral and central IOP measurements by rebound tonometry.

Authors:  Danson V Muttuvelu; Kirsten Baggesen; Niels Ehlers
Journal:  Acta Ophthalmol       Date:  2010-09-15       Impact factor: 3.761

2.  The influence of central corneal thickness and age on intraocular pressure measured by pneumotonometry, non-contact tonometry, the Tono-Pen XL, and Goldmann applanation tonometry.

Authors:  P-A Tonnu; T Ho; T Newson; A El Sheikh; K Sharma; E White; C Bunce; D Garway-Heath
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 4.638

3.  Comparison of the iCare rebound tonometer and the Goldmann applanation tonometer over a wide IOP range.

Authors:  S Munkwitz; A Elkarmouty; E M Hoffmann; N Pfeiffer; H Thieme
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2008-01-12       Impact factor: 3.117

4.  The influence of refractive errors on IOP measurement by rebound tonometry (ICare) and Goldmann applanation tonometry.

Authors:  Teresio Avitabile; Antonio Longo; Daniela Rocca; Roberta Amato; Caterina Gagliano; Marine Castaing
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2009-08-29       Impact factor: 3.117

5.  Assessment of IcareONE rebound tonometer for self-measuring intraocular pressure.

Authors:  Mari Sakamoto; Akiyasu Kanamori; Masashi Fujihara; Yuko Yamada; Makoto Nakamura; Akira Negi
Journal:  Acta Ophthalmol       Date:  2013-04-16       Impact factor: 3.761

6.  Comparison of ICare tonometer with Goldmann applanation tonometer in glaucoma patients.

Authors:  Paolo Brusini; Maria Letizia Salvetat; Marco Zeppieri; Claudia Tosoni; Lucia Parisi
Journal:  J Glaucoma       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 2.503

7.  Effect of corneal thickness on dynamic contour, rebound, and goldmann tonometry.

Authors:  Jose M Martinez-de-la-Casa; Julian Garcia-Feijoo; Eva Vico; Ana Fernandez-Vidal; Jose M Benitez del Castillo; Mohamed Wasfi; J Garcia-Sanchez
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2006-09-25       Impact factor: 12.079

8.  Three portable tonometers, the TGDc-01, the ICARE and the Tonopen XL, compared with each other and with Goldmann applanation tonometry*.

Authors:  Liane H van der Jagt; Nomdo M Jansonius
Journal:  Ophthalmic Physiol Opt       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 3.117

9.  Clinical comparison of the Icare tonometer and Goldmann applanation tonometry.

Authors:  Nima Pakrou; Tim Gray; Richard Mills; John Landers; Jamie Craig
Journal:  J Glaucoma       Date:  2008 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.503

10.  Repeatability of intraocular pressure measurements with Icare PRO rebound, Tono-Pen AVIA, and Goldmann tonometers in sitting and reclining positions.

Authors:  Caterina Schweier; James V M Hanson; Jens Funk; Marc Töteberg-Harms
Journal:  BMC Ophthalmol       Date:  2013-09-05       Impact factor: 2.209

View more
  4 in total

1.  Pediatric Patients and Tonometers.

Authors:  Sora Yasri; Viroj Wiwanitkit
Journal:  Turk J Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-08-15

2.  Risk factors for early onset elevated intraocular pressure after pterygium surgery.

Authors:  Kevin Wu; Hyunjoo J Lee; Manishi A Desai
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-08-23

Review 3.  Guidelines and Recommendations for Tonometry Use during the COVID-19 Era.

Authors:  Enmar M Almazyad; Sally Ameen; Mohammad A Khan; Rizwan Malik
Journal:  Middle East Afr J Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-07-20

Review 4.  How glaucoma care changed for the better after the pandemic.

Authors:  Kateki Vinod; Paul A Sidoti
Journal:  Curr Opin Ophthalmol       Date:  2022-03-01       Impact factor: 3.761

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.