Evaluation of the intraocular pressure measured with the ocular response analyzer

Current Eye Research

Volumn 35, Issue 7, 2010, Pages 587-596

  Ogbuehi, Kelechi C ^a   Almubrad, Turki M ^a  

^a KING SAUD UNIVERSITY   (Saudi Arabia)

Author keywords

Goldmann tonometer; Non contact tonometer; Ocular Response Analyzer; ORA; Repeatability; Tonometry

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ANALYZER; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED STUDY; EVALUATION; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; OCULAR RESPONSE ANALYZER; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TONOMETER; TONOMETRY; BIOMECHANICS; CORNEA; DEVICES; EVALUATION STUDY; OCULOPLETHYSMOGRAPHY; PHYSIOLOGY; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; REPRODUCIBILITY; YOUNG ADULT;

ADULT; BIOMECHANICAL PHENOMENA; CORNEA; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE; MALE; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; TONOMETRY, OCULAR; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 77954417022     PISSN: 02713683     EISSN: 14602202     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/02713681003698871     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Collaborative Normal-Tension Glaucoma Study Group. Comparison of glaucomatous progression between untreated patients with normal-tension glaucoma and patients with therapeutically reduced intraocular pres sures. Am J Ophthalmol. 1998a;126:487-497. Erratum in: Am J Ophthalmol 1999;127:120.
2. Collaborative Normal-Tension Glaucoma Study Group. The effectiveness of intraocular pressure reduction in the treatment of normal-tension glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol 1998b;126: 498-505. (Pubitemid 28475913)
3. Kass MA, Heuer DK, Higginbotham EJ, et al. The ocular hypertension treatment study: a randomized trial determines that topical ocular hypotensive medication delays or prevents the onset of primary open-angle glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol 2002;120:701-713; discussion 829-830
4. Leske MC. The epidemiology of open-angle glaucoma: a review. Am J Epidemiol 1983;118:166-191.
5. Bhan A, Browning AC, Shah S, et al. Effect of corneal thickness on intraocular pressure measurements with the pneumotonometer, Goldmann applanation tonometer, and Tono-Pen. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2002;43:1389-1392. (Pubitemid 34462635)
6. Morgan AJ, Harper J, Hosking SL, Gilmartin B. The effect of corneal thickness and corneal curvature on pneumatonom-eter measurements. Curr Eye Res 2002;25:107-112. (Pubitemid 36120904)
7. Aakre BM, Doughty MJ, Dalane OV, et al. Assessment of reproducibility of measures of intraocular pressure and central corneal thickness in young white adults over a 16-h time period. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2003;23:271-283.
8. 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;122:1117-1121. (Pubitemid 39031125)
9. Sullivan-Mee M, Pham F. Correspondence of Tono-Pen intraocular pressure measurements performed at the central cornea and mid-peripheral cornea. Optometry 2004;75:26-32. (Pubitemid 38161022)
10. Foster PJ, Baasanhu J, Alsbirk PH, et al. Central corneal thickness and intraocular pressure in a Mongolian population. Ophthalmology 1998;105:969-973. (Pubitemid 28268317)
11. 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.
12. Saleh TA, Adams M, McDermott B, Claridge KG, Ewings P. Effects of central corneal thickness and corneal curvature on the intraocular pressure measurement by Goldmann appla-nation tonometer and ocular blood fow pneumatonometer. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol 2006;34:516-520. (Pubitemid 44241345)
13. Doughty MJ, Jonuscheit S. Effect of central corneal thickness on Goldmann applanation tonometry measures-a different result with different pachymeters. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2007;245:1603-1610. (Pubitemid 47491547)
14. Francis BA, Hsieh A, Lai MY, et al. Los Angeles Latino Eye Study Group. Effects of corneal thickness, corneal curvature, and intraocular pressure level on Goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry. Ophthalmology 2007;114:20-26. (Pubitemid 46014299)
15. Feltgen N, Leifert D, Funk J. Correlation between central corneal thickness, applanation tonometry, and direct intra-cameral IOP readings. Br J Ophthalmol 2001;85:85-87. (Pubitemid 32060201)
16. 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; discussion 829.
17. Luce DA. Determining in vivo biomechanical properties of the cornea with an ocular response analyzer. J Cataract Refract Surg 2005;31:156-162.
18. Broman AT, Congdon NG, Bandeen-Roche K, Quigley HA. Infuence of corneal structure, corneal responsiveness, and other ocular parameters on tonometric measurement of intraocular pressure. J Glaucoma 2007;16:581-588. (Pubitemid 350307608)
19. Kirwan C, O'Keefe M, Lanigan B. Corneal hysteresis and intraocular pressure measurement in children using the reichert ocular response analyzer. Am J Ophthalmol 2006;142:990-992. (Pubitemid 44853910)
20. Hager A, Loge K, Füllhas MO, et al. Changes in corneal hysteresis after clear corneal cataract surgery. Am J Ophthalmol 2007;144:341-346. (Pubitemid 47331402)
21. Lam A, Chen D, Chiu R, Chui WS. Comparison of IOP measurements between ORA and GAT in normal Chinese. Optom Vis Sci 2007;84:909-914. (Pubitemid 47415167)
22. Ortiz D, Piñero D, Shabayek MH, Arnalich-Montiel F, Alió JL. Corneal biomechanical properties in normal, post-laser in situ keratomileusis, and keratoconic eyes. J Cataract Refract Surg 2007;33:1371-1375. (Pubitemid 47096684)
23. 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.
24. Shah S, Laiquzzaman M, Bhojwani R, Mantry S, Cunliffe I. Assessment of the biomechanical properties of the cornea with the ocular response analyzer in normal and kerato-conic eyes. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2007;48:3026-3031. (Pubitemid 351261143)
25. González-Méijome JM, Queirós A, Jorge J, Díaz-Rey A, Parafta MA. Intraoffce variability of corneal biomechani-cal parameters and intraocular pressure (IOP). Optom Vis Sci 2008;85:457-462.
26. Moreno-Montañés J, Maldonado MJ, García N, et al. Repro-ducibility and clinical relevance of the ocular response analyzer in nonoperated eyes: corneal biomechanical and tonometric implications. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2008;49:968-974.
27. Sullivan-Mee M, Billingsley SC, Patel AD, et al. Ocular Response Analyzer in subjects with and without glaucoma. Optom Vis Sci 2008;85:463-470.
28. Mollan SP, Wolffsohn JS, Nessim M, et al. Ocular Response Analyser, Pascal and TonoPen XL tonometry in keratoconic and normal eyes. Br J Ophthalmol 2008;92: 1661-1665.
29. Shen M, Fan F, Xue A, et al. Biomechanical properties of the cornea in high myopia. Vision Res 2008;48:2167-2171.
30. Kerautret J, Colin J, Touboul D, Roberts C. Biomechanical characteristics of the ectatic cornea. J Cataract Refract Surg 2008;34:510-513. (Pubitemid 351625580)
31. Congdon NG, Broman AT, Bandeen-Roche K, Grover D, Quigley HA. Central corneal thickness and corneal hysteresis associated with glaucoma damage. Am J Ophthalmol 2006;141:868-875.
32. Ogbuehi KC. Assessment of the accuracy and reliability of the Topcon CT80 non-contact tonometer. Clin Exp Optom 2006;89:310-314.
33. Stocker FW. On changes in intraocular pressure after application of the tonometer; in the same eye and in the other eye. Am J Ophthalmol 1958;45:192-196.
34. Moses RA, Liu CH. Repeated applanation tonometry. Am J Ophthalmol 1968;66: 89-91.
35. Sorensen PN. The noncontact tonometer. Clinical evaluation on normal and diseased eyes. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh) 1975;53:513-521.
36. Chauhan BC, Henson DB. Clinical evaluation of the non-contact Tonometer Mark II. Am J Optom Physiol Opt 1988;65:751-756.
37. Bynke HG, Schele B. On the origin of the ocular pressure pulse. Ophthalmologica 1967;153:29-36.
38. Leydhecker W. The intraocular pressure. Clinical aspects. Ann Ophthalmol 1976;8:389-401.
39. Perkins ES. The ocular pulse. Curr Eye Res 1981;1:19-23. (Pubitemid 11093748)
40. Ogbuehi KC, Almubrad TM. Accuracy and reliability of the Keeler Pulsair EasyEye non-contact tonometer. Optom Vis Sci 2008;85:61-66.
41. Liu JH, Kripke DF, Twa MD, et al. Twenty-four-hour pattern of intraocular pressure in the aging population. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1999;40:2912-2917.
42. Faul F, Erdfelder E, Lang AG, Buchner A. G*power 3: a fex-ible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioural, and biomedical sciences. BRM 2007;39:175-191.
43. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986;1:307-310. (Pubitemid 16134762)
44. Bland JM, Altman DG. Measuring agreement in method comparison studies. Stat Methods Med Res 1999;8:135-160. (Pubitemid 29425900)
45. Martinez-de-la-Casa JM, Garcia-Feijoo J, Fernandez-Vidal A, Mendez-Hernandez C, Garcia-Sanchez J. Ocular response analyzer versus Goldmann applanation tonometry for intraocular pressure measurements. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2006;47:4410-4414. (Pubitemid 46579366)
46. Shields MB. The non-contact tonometer. Its value and limitations. Surv Ophthalmol 1980;24:211-219.