Accuracy of Goldmann, ocular response analyser, Pascal and TonoPen XL tonometry in keratoconic and normal eyes

British Journal of Ophthalmology

Volumn 92, Issue 12, 2008, Pages 1661-1665

  Mollan, S P ^a   Wolffsohn, J S ^b   Nessim, M ^a   Laiquzzaman, M ^c   Sivakumar, S ^c   Hartley, S ^a,c   Shah, S ^a,b,c  

^a CITY HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^b ASTON UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^c SOLIHULL HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL PRACTICE; CORNEA; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; FEMALE; HUMAN; HYSTERESIS; INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE; KERATOCONUS; MALE; OCULOPLETHYSMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; R FACTOR; TONOMETER; ULTRASOUND;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; CORNEAL TOPOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE; KERATOCONUS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; REFERENCE VALUES; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TONOMETRY, OCULAR; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 57149087528     PISSN: 00071161     EISSN: 14682079     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bjo.2007.136473     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Doughty MJ, Zaman ML. Human corneal thickness and its impact on intraocular pressure measures: a review and meta-analysis approach. Surv Ophthalmol 2000;44:367-408.
2. Whitacre MM, Stein R. Sources of error with use of Goldmann-type tonometers. Surv Ophthalmol 1993;38:1-30.
3. Goldmann H, Schmidt T. Über Applanationstonometrie. Ophthalmologica 1957;134:221-42.
4. Rask G, Behndig A. Effects of corneal thickness, curvature, astigmatism and direction of gaze on Goldmann applanation tonometry readings. Ophthalmic Res 2006;38:49-55.
5. Browning AC, Bhan A, Rotchford AP, et al. The effect of corneal thickness on intraocular pressure measurement in patients with corneal pathology. Br J Ophthalmol 2004;88:1395-9.
6. Brooks AM, Robertson IF, Mahoney AM. Ocular rigidity and intraocular pressure in keratoconus. Aust J Ophthalmol 1984;12:317-24.
7. Böhm A, Kohlhaas M, Lerche RC, et al. Measuring intraocular pressure in keratoconus. Effect of the changed biomechanics. Ophthalmologe 1997;94:771-4.
8. Ozbek Z, Cohen EJ, Hammersmith KM, et al. Dynamic contour tonometry: a new way to assess intraocular pressure in ectatic corneas. Cornea 2006;25:890-4.
9. Shah S, Laiquzzaman M, Bhojwani R, et al. Assessment of the biomechanical properties of the cornea with the ocular response analyzer in normal and keratoconic eyes. Invest Ophthal Vis Sci 2007;48:3026- 31.
10. Luce D. Determining in vivo biomechanical properties of the cornea with an ocular response analyzer. J Cataract Refract Surg 2005;31:156-62.
11. Laiquzzaman M, Bhojwani B, Cunliffe I, et al. Diurnal variation of ocular hysteresis in normal subjects: relevance in clinical context. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol 2006;34:114-8.
12. Shah S, Laiquzzaman M, Cunliffe I, et al. The use of the Reichert ocular response analyser to establish the relationship between ocular hysteresis, corneal resistance factor and central corneal thickness in normal eyes. Cont Lens Anterior Eye 2006;29:257-62.
13. Mackay RS, Marg E. Fast, automatic, electronic tonometers based on an exact theory. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh) 1959;37:495-507.
14. Bland JM, Altman DG. Measuring agreement in method comparison studies. Stat Methods Med Res 1999;8:135-60.
15. Cervino A. Rebound tonometry: new opportunities and limitations of non-invasive determination of intraocular pressure. Br J Ophthalmol 2006;90:1444-6.
16. Asensio I, Rahhal SM, Alonso L, et al. Corneal thickness values before and after oxybuprocaine 0.4% eye drops. Cornea 2003;22:527-32.
17. Horse P, Siu A. Short-term effects of proparacaine on human corneal thickness. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh) 1992;70:740-4.
18. Baudouin C, Gastaud P. Influence of topical anesthesia on tonometric values of intraocular pressure. Ophthalmologica 1994;208:309-13.
19. Nam SM, Lee HK, Kim EK, et al. Comparison of corneal thickness after the instillation of topical anesthetics: proparacaine versus oxybuprocaine. Cornea 2006;25:51-4.
20. Zadnik K, Steger-May K, Fink BA, et al. CLEK Study Group. Collaborative longitudinal evaluation of keratoconus. Between-eye asymmetry in keratoconus. Cornea 2002;21:671-921.
21. Hansen F, Ehlers N. Elevated tonometer readings caused by a thick cornea. Acta Ophthalmol 1971;9:775-8.
22. Johnson M, Kass MA, Moses RA, et al. Increased corneal thickness simulating elevated intraocular pressure. Arch Ophthalmol 1978;96:664-5.
23. Kaufmann C, Bachmann LM, Thiel MA. Intraocular pressure measurements using dynamic contour tonometry after laser in situ keratomileusis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2003;44:3790-4.
24. Pepose JS, Feigenbaum SK, Qazi MA, et al. Changes in corneal biomechanics and intraocular pressure following LASIK using static, dynamic, and noncontact tonometry. Am J Ophthalmol 2007;143:39-47.
25. Ortiz D, Piñero D, Shabayek MH, et al. Corneal biomechanical properties in normal, post-laser in situ keratomileusis, and keratoconic eyes. J Cataract Refract Surg 2007;33:1371-5.
26. Congdon NG, Broman AT, Bandeen-Roche K, et al. Central corneal thickness and corneal hysteresis associated with glaucoma damage. Am J Ophthalmol 2006;141:868-75.
27. IIiev ME, Goldblum D, Katsoulis K, et al. Comparison of rebound tonometry with Goldmann applanation tonometry and correlation with central corneal thickness. Br J Ophthalmol 2006;90:833-5.
28. González-Méijome JM, Jorge J, Queirós A, et al. Age differences in central and peripheral intraocular pressure using a rebound tonometer. Br J Ophthalmol 2006;90:1495-1500.