Comparison of current tonometry techniques in measurement of intraocular pressure
Purpose: To compare four tonometry techniques: Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT), Dynamic contour tonometer (DCT), Non-contact tonometer (NCT), and Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA) in the measurement of intraocular pressure (IOP) and the impact of some corneal biomechanical factors on their perform...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications
2017-06-01
|
| Series: | Journal of Current Ophthalmology |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2452232516301159 |
| _version_ | 1831684997003608064 |
|---|---|
| author | Behrooz Kouchaki Hassan Hashemi Abbasali Yekta Mehdi khabazkhoob |
| author_facet | Behrooz Kouchaki Hassan Hashemi Abbasali Yekta Mehdi khabazkhoob |
| author_sort | Behrooz Kouchaki |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Purpose: To compare four tonometry techniques: Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT), Dynamic contour tonometer (DCT), Non-contact tonometer (NCT), and Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA) in the measurement of intraocular pressure (IOP) and the impact of some corneal biomechanical factors on their performance.
Methods: In this cross-sectional study, volunteers with normal ophthalmic examination and no history of eye surgery (except for uncomplicated cataract surgery) or trauma were selected. Twenty-five subjects were male, and 21 were female. The mean age was 48 ± 19.2 years. Anterior segment parameters were measured with Scheimpflug imaging. IOP was measured with GAT, DCT, NCT, and ORA in random order. A 95% limit of agreement of IOPs was analyzed. The impact of different parameters on the measured IOP with each device was evaluated by regression analysis.
Results: The average IOP measured with GAT, DCT, NCT, and ORA was 16.4 ± 3.5, 18.1 ± 3.4, 16.2 ± 3.9, and 17.3 ± 3.4 mmHg, respectively. The difference of IOP measured with NCT and GAT was not significant (P = 0.382). Intraocular pressure was significantly different between GAT with DCT and IOPCC (P < 0.001 and P = 0.022, respectively). The 95% limit of agreement of DCT, NCT, and IOPCC with GAT was −5.7 to 2.5, −4.1 to 4.7, and −5.3–3.7 mmHg, respectively. Simple regression model corneal resistance factor (CRF) and central corneal thickness (CCT) and multivariate model CRF had a significant relationship with IOP measured with the four devices.
Conclusion: Although the mean difference of measured IOP by NCT, DCT, and ORA with GAT was less than 2 mmHg, the limit of agreement was relatively large. CCT and CRF were important influencing factors in the four types of tonometers. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-20T08:11:50Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-a163ee6d4bd0473ea84814ce8c18aeb9 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2452-2325 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-20T08:11:50Z |
| publishDate | 2017-06-01 |
| publisher | Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Journal of Current Ophthalmology |
| spelling | doaj.art-a163ee6d4bd0473ea84814ce8c18aeb92022-12-21T19:47:15ZengWolters Kluwer Medknow PublicationsJournal of Current Ophthalmology2452-23252017-06-01292929710.1016/j.joco.2016.08.010Comparison of current tonometry techniques in measurement of intraocular pressureBehrooz Kouchaki0Hassan Hashemi1Abbasali Yekta2Mehdi khabazkhoob3Noor Research Center for Ophthalmic Epidemiology, Noor Eye Hospital, Tehran, IranNoor Ophthalmology Research Center, Noor Eye Hospital, Tehran, IranDepartment of Optometry, School of Paramedical Sciences, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, IranDepartment of Medical Surgical Nursing, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, IranPurpose: To compare four tonometry techniques: Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT), Dynamic contour tonometer (DCT), Non-contact tonometer (NCT), and Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA) in the measurement of intraocular pressure (IOP) and the impact of some corneal biomechanical factors on their performance. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, volunteers with normal ophthalmic examination and no history of eye surgery (except for uncomplicated cataract surgery) or trauma were selected. Twenty-five subjects were male, and 21 were female. The mean age was 48 ± 19.2 years. Anterior segment parameters were measured with Scheimpflug imaging. IOP was measured with GAT, DCT, NCT, and ORA in random order. A 95% limit of agreement of IOPs was analyzed. The impact of different parameters on the measured IOP with each device was evaluated by regression analysis. Results: The average IOP measured with GAT, DCT, NCT, and ORA was 16.4 ± 3.5, 18.1 ± 3.4, 16.2 ± 3.9, and 17.3 ± 3.4 mmHg, respectively. The difference of IOP measured with NCT and GAT was not significant (P = 0.382). Intraocular pressure was significantly different between GAT with DCT and IOPCC (P < 0.001 and P = 0.022, respectively). The 95% limit of agreement of DCT, NCT, and IOPCC with GAT was −5.7 to 2.5, −4.1 to 4.7, and −5.3–3.7 mmHg, respectively. Simple regression model corneal resistance factor (CRF) and central corneal thickness (CCT) and multivariate model CRF had a significant relationship with IOP measured with the four devices. Conclusion: Although the mean difference of measured IOP by NCT, DCT, and ORA with GAT was less than 2 mmHg, the limit of agreement was relatively large. CCT and CRF were important influencing factors in the four types of tonometers.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2452232516301159Intraocular pressureTonometryGoldmann applanation tonometerDynamic contour tonometerNon-contact tonometerOcular response analyze |
| spellingShingle | Behrooz Kouchaki Hassan Hashemi Abbasali Yekta Mehdi khabazkhoob Comparison of current tonometry techniques in measurement of intraocular pressure Journal of Current Ophthalmology Intraocular pressure Tonometry Goldmann applanation tonometer Dynamic contour tonometer Non-contact tonometer Ocular response analyze |
| title | Comparison of current tonometry techniques in measurement of intraocular pressure |
| title_full | Comparison of current tonometry techniques in measurement of intraocular pressure |
| title_fullStr | Comparison of current tonometry techniques in measurement of intraocular pressure |
| title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of current tonometry techniques in measurement of intraocular pressure |
| title_short | Comparison of current tonometry techniques in measurement of intraocular pressure |
| title_sort | comparison of current tonometry techniques in measurement of intraocular pressure |
| topic | Intraocular pressure Tonometry Goldmann applanation tonometer Dynamic contour tonometer Non-contact tonometer Ocular response analyze |
| url | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2452232516301159 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT behroozkouchaki comparisonofcurrenttonometrytechniquesinmeasurementofintraocularpressure AT hassanhashemi comparisonofcurrenttonometrytechniquesinmeasurementofintraocularpressure AT abbasaliyekta comparisonofcurrenttonometrytechniquesinmeasurementofintraocularpressure AT mehdikhabazkhoob comparisonofcurrenttonometrytechniquesinmeasurementofintraocularpressure |