Intraocular pressure: Relevant or redundant?

Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology

Volumn 33, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 113-114

  Danesh Meyer, Helen V ^a   Quigley, Harry A ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND   (New Zealand)

^b JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANALYTICAL ERROR; CORNEA THICKNESS; EDITORIAL; HUMAN; INTRAOCULAR HYPERTENSION; INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE; KERATOMILEUSIS; OPEN ANGLE GLAUCOMA; OPTIC DISK; PRESSURE MEASUREMENT; PROGNOSIS; REFRACTIVE SURGERY; STRESS; TELEMETRY; TONOMETER; VALIDATION PROCESS; VISCOELASTICITY; VISUAL FIELD; VISUAL SYSTEM EXAMINATION;

CORNEA; GLAUCOMA; HUMANS; INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE; KERATOMILEUSIS, LASER IN SITU; REFRACTIVE ERRORS; TONOMETRY, OCULAR;

EID: 18644382061     PISSN: 14426404     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1442-9071.2005.00998.x     Document Type: Editorial

References (17)

1. Cheng ACK, Leung DYL, Cheung EYY, Fan DSP, Law RWK, Lam DSC. Intraocular pressure measurement in patients with previous LASIK surgery using pressure phosphene tonometer. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol 2005; 33: 153-7.
2. Danesh-Meyer HV, Niederer R, Gaskin BJ, Gamble G. Comparison of the Proview pressure phosphene tonometer performed by the patient and examiner with the Goldmann applanation tonometer. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol 2004; 32: 29-32.
3. Li J, Herndon LW, Asrani SG, Stinnett S, Allingham RR. Clinical comparison of the Proview eye pressure monitor with the Goldmann applanation tonometer and the TonoPen. Arch Ophthalmol 2004; 122: 1117-21.
4. Alvarez TL, Gollance SA, Thomas GA et al. The Proview phosphene tonometer fails to measure ocular pressure accurately in clinical practice. Ophthamology 2004; 111: 1077-85.
5. Chew GSM, Sanderson GF, Molteno ACB. The pressure phosphene tonometer - a clinical evaluation. Eye 2004; 11: 1-3 (Epub ahead of print).
6. Goldmann H, Schmidt T. [Applanation tonometry.] Ophthalmologica 1957; 134: 221-42.
7. Ehlers N, Bramsen T, Sperling S. Applanation tonometry and central corneal thickness. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh) 1975; 53: 34-43.
8. Whitacre MM, Stein RA, Hassanein K. The effect of corneal thickness on applanation tonometry. Am J Ophthalmol 1993; 115: 592-6.
9. Phelan PS, McGhee CN, Bryce IG. Excimer laser PRK and corticosteroid induced IOP elevation: the tip of an emerging iceberg?. Br J Ophthalmol 1994; 78: 802-3.
10. Munger R, Hodge WG, Mintsioulis G, Agapitos PJ, Jackson WB, Damji KF. Correction of intraocular pressure for changes in central corneal thickness following photorefractive keratectomy. Can J Ophthalmol 1998; 33: 159-65.
11. Foster PJ, Buhrmann R, Quigley HA, Johnson GJ. The definition and classification of glaucoma in prevalence surveys. Br J Ophthalmol 2002; 86: 238-42.
12. Tielsch JM, Katz J, Singh K et al. A population-based evaluation of glaucoma screening: The Baltimore Eye Survey. Am J Epidemiol 1991; 134: 1102-10.
13. Weih LM, Nanjan M, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. Prevalence and predictors of open-angle glaucoma. Results from the Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmology 2001; 108: 1966-72.
14. Wilson MR. The myth of '21'. J Glaucoma 1997; 6: 75-7.
15. Gordon MO, Beiser JA, Brandt JD et al. The Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study: baseline factors that predict the onset of primary open-angle glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol 2002; 120: 714-20.
16. Leske MC, Heijl A, Hussein M et al. Factors for glaucoma progression and the effect of treatment: the early manifest glaucoma trial. Arch Ophthalmol 2003; 121: 48-56.
17. Brandt JD. Corneal thickness in glaucoma screening, diagnosis, and management. Curr Opinion Ophthalmol 2004; 15: 85-9.