Masato Matsuura1,2, Hiroshi Murata1, Yuri Fujino1, Mieko Yanagisawa1, Yoshitaka Nakao3, Shunsuke Nakakura4, Yoshiaki Kiuchi1, Ryo Asaoka1. 1. Department of Ophthalmology, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan. 2. Department of Ophthalmology, Graduate School of Medical Science, Kitasato University, Sagamihara, Kanagawa, Japan. 3. Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan. 4. Department of Ophthalmology, Saneikai Tsukazaki Hospital, Himeji, Japan.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the repeatability of intraocular pressure (IOP) measured with the Corvis ST (CST) and the Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA). METHODS: A total of 141 eyes from 141 subjects were studied, including 35 healthy eyes and 106 glaucomatous eyes. All subjects underwent IOP evaluations with Goldmann applanation tonometer, CST, and ORA. With CST, biomechanical corrected IOP (bIOP) was calculated; bIOP is purported to be less dependent on biomechanical properties. For ORA, corneal-compensated intraocular pressure (IOPcc) and Goldmann-correlated IOP (IOPg) were derived. The repeatability of the various IOP values was assessed using the coefficient of variance (CV) and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). RESULTS: The CV with bIOP (5.5 ± 3.1: mean ± standard deviation) was significantly smaller than the CVs measured with IOPg (7.3 ± 4.3) and IOPcc (7.2 ± 4.4). ICC values were 0.90, 0.80, and 0.86 with IOPg, IOPcc, and bIOP, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The bIOP showed a better prevision and repeatability for IOP measurement. TRANSLATIONAL RELEVANCE: The bIOP measurement from CST had a better reproducible than IOPcc measurement from ORA.
PURPOSE: To assess the repeatability of intraocular pressure (IOP) measured with the Corvis ST (CST) and the Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA). METHODS: A total of 141 eyes from 141 subjects were studied, including 35 healthy eyes and 106 glaucomatous eyes. All subjects underwent IOP evaluations with Goldmann applanation tonometer, CST, and ORA. With CST, biomechanical corrected IOP (bIOP) was calculated; bIOP is purported to be less dependent on biomechanical properties. For ORA, corneal-compensated intraocular pressure (IOPcc) and Goldmann-correlated IOP (IOPg) were derived. The repeatability of the various IOP values was assessed using the coefficient of variance (CV) and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). RESULTS: The CV with bIOP (5.5 ± 3.1: mean ± standard deviation) was significantly smaller than the CVs measured with IOPg (7.3 ± 4.3) and IOPcc (7.2 ± 4.4). ICC values were 0.90, 0.80, and 0.86 with IOPg, IOPcc, and bIOP, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The bIOP showed a better prevision and repeatability for IOP measurement. TRANSLATIONAL RELEVANCE: The bIOP measurement from CST had a better reproducible than IOPcc measurement from ORA.
Authors: Archana Bhan; Andrew C Browning; Sunil Shah; Robin Hamilton; Dinesh Dave; Harminder S Dua Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2002-05 Impact factor: 4.799