Comparison of the rebound tonometer with the Goldmann applanation tonometer in glaucoma patients

Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology

Volumn 35, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 335-339

  Sahin, Afsun ^a   Niyaz, Leyla ^a   Yildirim, Nilgun ^a  

^a ESKISEHIR OSMANGAZI UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

Author keywords

Glaucoma; Goldmann applanation tonometer; Intraocular pressure; Rebound tonometer

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORNEA THICKNESS; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; FEMALE; GLAUCOMA; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE; LINEAR REGRESSION ANALYSIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PRESSURE MEASUREMENT; STUDENT T TEST; TONOMETER; TONOMETRY; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CORNEA; ECHOGRAPHY; HISTOLOGY; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; OCULOPLETHYSMOGRAPHY; REPRODUCIBILITY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CORNEA; FEMALE; GLAUCOMA; HUMANS; INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; TONOMETRY, OCULAR;

EID: 34447631350     PISSN: 14426404     EISSN: 14429071     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1442-9071.2007.01451.x     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Leske MC. The epidemiology of open-angle glaucoma: A review. Am J Epidemiol 1983; 118: 166-91.
2. Rajak SN, Paul J, Sharma V, Vickers S. Contamination of disposable tonometer prisms during tonometry. Eye 2006; 20: 358-61.
3. Sood D, Honavar SG. Sterilisation of tonometers and gonioscopes. Indian J Ophthalmol 1998; 46: 113-16.
4. Dekking HM, Coster HD. Dynamic tonometry. Ophthalmologica 1967; 154: 59-74.
5. Brusini P, Salvetat ML, Zeppieri M, Tosoni C, Parisi L. Comparison of ICare tonometer with Goldmann applanation tonometer in glaucoma patients. J Glaucoma 2006; 15: 213-17.
6. Martinez-de-la-Casa JM, Garcia-Feijoo J, Castillo A, Garcia-Sanchez J. Reproducibility and clinical evaluation of rebound tonometry. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2005; 46: 4578-80.
7. Nakamura M, Darhad U, Tatsumi Y et al. Agreement of rebound tonometer in measuring intraocular pressure with three types of applanation tonometers. Am J Ophthalmol 2006; 142: 332-4.
8. Martinez-de-la-Casa JM, Garcia-Feijoo J, Vico E et al. Effect of corneal thickness on dynamic contour, rebound, and Goldmann tonometry. Ophthalmology 2006; 113: 2156-62.
9. Ray WA, O'Day DM. Statistical analysis of multi-eye data in ophthalmic research. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1985; 26: 1186-8.
10. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986; 1: 307-10.
11. Kontiola A. A new electromechanical method for measuring intraocular pressure. Doc Ophthalmol 1996; 93: 265-76.
12. Kontiola AI. A new induction-based impact method for measuring intraocular pressure. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 2000; 78: 142-5.
13. Fernandes P, Diaz-Rey JA, Queiros A, Gonzalez-Meijome JM, Jorge J. Comparison of the ICare rebound tonometer with the Goldmann tonometer in a normal population. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2005; 25: 436-40.
14. van der Jagt LH, Jansonius NM. Three portable tonometers, the TGDc-01, the ICARE and the Tonopen XL, compared with each other and with Goldmann applanation tonometry. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2005; 25: 429-35.
15. Garcia-Resua C, Gonzalez-Meijome JM, Gilino J, Yebra-Pimentel E. Accuracy of the new ICare rebound tonometer vs. other portable tonometers in healthy eyes. Optom Vis Sci 2006; 83: 102-7.