Comparison of Dynamic Contour Tonometry and Goldmann Applanation Tonometry in Glaucoma Patients and Healthy Subjects

American Journal of Ophthalmology

Volumn 142, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 583-590

  Barleon, Lorenz ^a   Hoffmann, Esther M ^a   Berres, Manfred ^a,b   Pfeiffer, Norbert ^a   Grus, Franz H ^a  

^a JOHANNES GUTENBERG UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^b Department of Mathematics and Technology   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; EVALUATION; FEMALE; GLAUCOMA; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; TONOMETRY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CORNEA; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; FEMALE; GLAUCOMA; HUMANS; INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OCULAR HYPERTENSION; PERIMETRY; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; TONOMETRY, OCULAR; VISUAL ACUITY;

EID: 33748983782     PISSN: 00029394     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2006.05.030     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Brandt J.D. Corneal thickness in glaucoma screening, diagnosis, and management. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 15 (2004) 85-89
2. Dielemans I., Vingerling J.R., Hofman A., et al. Reliability of intraocular pressure measurement with the Goldmann applanation tonometer in epidemiological studies. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 232 (1994) 141-144
3. Goldmann H., and Schmidt T. Über Applanationsttonometrie. Ophthalmologica 134 (1957) 221-242
4. Wessels I.F., and Oh Y. Tonometer utilization, accuracy, and calibration under field conditions. Arch Ophthalmol 108 (1990) 1709-1712
5. Whitacre M.M., and Stein R. Sources of error with use of Goldmann-type tonometers. Surv Ophthalmol 38 (1993) 1-30
6. Wolfs R.C., Klaver C.C., Vingerling J.R., et al. Distribution of central corneal thickness and its association with intraocular pressure: The Rotterdam Study. Am J Ophthalmol 123 (1997) 767-772
7. Ehlers N., Bramsen T., and Sperling S. Applanation tonometry and central corneal thickness. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh) 53 (1975) 34-43
8. Whitacre M.M., Stein R.A., and Hassanein K. The effect of corneal thickness on applanation tonometry. Am J Ophthalmol 115 (1993) 592-596
9. Hoffmann E.M., Grus F.H., and Pfeiffer N. Intraocular pressure and ocular pulse amplitude using dynamic contour tonometry and contact lens tonometry. BMC Ophthalmol 4 (2004) 4
10. Kniestedt C., Nee M., and Stamper R.L. Accuracy of dynamic contour tonometry compared with applanation tonometry in human cadaver eyes of different hydration states. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 243 (2005) 359-366
11. Altman D.G., and Bland J.M. Comparison of methods of measuring blood pressure. J Epidemiol Commun Health 40 (1986) 274-277
12. Bron A.M., Creuzot-Garcher C., Goudeau-Boutillon S., et al. Falsely elevated intraocular pressure due to increased central corneal thickness. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 237 (1999) 220-224
13. Shah S., Chatterjee A., Mathai M., et al. Relationship between corneal thickness and measured intraocular pressure in a general ophthalmology clinic. Ophthalmology 106 (1999) 2154-2160
14. Stodtmeister R. Applanation tonometry and correction according to corneal thickness. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 76 (1998) 319-324
15. Duba I., and Wirthlin A.C. Dynamic contour tonometry for post-LASIK intraocular pressure measurements. Klin Monatsbl Augenheilkd 221 (2004) 347-350
16. Kaufmann C., Bachmann L.M., and Thiel M.A. Intraocular pressure measurements using dynamic contour tonometry after laser in situ keratomileusis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 44 (2003) 3790-3794
17. Siganos D.S., Papastergiou G.I., and Moedas C. Assessment of the Pascal dynamic contour tonometer in monitoring intraocular pressure in unoperated eyes and eyes after LASIK. J Cataract Refract Surg 30 (2004) 746-751
18. Argus W.A. Ocular hypertension and central corneal thickness. Ophthalmology 102 (1995) 1810-1812
19. Brandt J.D., Beiser J.A., Kass M.A., et al. Central corneal thickness in the Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study (OHTS). Ophthalmology 108 (2001) 1779-1788
20. Shimmyo M., Ross A.J., Moy A., et al. Intraocular pressure, Goldmann applanation tension, corneal thickness, and corneal curvature in Caucasians, Asians, Hispanics, and African-Americans. Am J Ophthalmol 136 (2003) 603-613
21. Kanngiesser H.E., Kniestedt C., and Robert Y.C. Dynamic contour tonometry: presentation of a new tonometer. J Glaucoma 14 (2005) 344-350
22. Kaufmann C., Bachmann L.M., and Thiel M.A. Comparison of dynamic contour tonometry with Goldmann applanation tonometry. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 45 (2004) 3118-3121
23. Kniestedt C., Nee M., and Stamper R.L. Dynamic contour tonometry: a comparative study on human cadaver eyes. Arch Ophthalmol 122 (2004) 1287-1293
24. Ku J.Y., Danesh-Meyer H.V., Craig J.P., et al. Comparison of intraocular pressure measured by Pascal dynamic contour tonometry and Goldmann applanation tonometry. Eye (2005) Forthcoming
25. Doyle A., and Lachkar Y. Comparison of dynamic contour tonometry with Goldman applanation tonometry over a wide range of central corneal thickness. J Glaucoma 14 (2005) 288-292
26. Kamppeter B.A., and Jonas J.B. Dynamic contour tonometry for intraocular pressure measurement. Am J Ophthalmol 140 (2005) 318-320
27. Kniestedt C., Lin S., Choe J., et al. Clinical comparison of contour and applanation tonometry and their relationship to pachymetry. Arch Ophthalmol 123 (2005) 1532-1557
28. Kotecha A., White E.T., Shewry J.M., et al. The relative effects of corneal thickness and age on Goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry. Br J Ophthalmol 89 (2005) 1572-1575
29. Swiss-Microtechnology-AG. PASCAL. Dynamic contour tonometer. User manual, Version 2.0, 2004:1-61.
30. Kanski J.J. Klinische Ophthalmologie, Lehrbuch und Atlas, 5. Auflage ed. (2004), Urban und Fischer, München 1-732
31. Bland J.M., and Altman D.G. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1 (1986) 307-310
32. Ludbrook J. Statistical techniques for comparing measurers and methods of measurement: a critical review. Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol 29 (2002) 527-536
33. Pache M., Wilmsmeyer S., Lautebach S., et al. Dynamic contour tonometry versus Goldmann applanation tonometry: a comparative study. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 243 (2005) 763-767
34. Gange S.J., Linton K.L., Scott A.J., et al. A comparison of methods for correlated ordinal measures with ophthalmic applications. Stat Med 14 (1995) 1961-1974
35. Hand D., and Taylor C. Multivariate analysis of variance and repeated measures: a practical approach for behavioral scientists (1987), Chapman and Hall, Boca Raton, Florida 1-304