Comparison of intraocular pressure measurement between rebound, non-contact and Goldmann applanation tonometry in treated glaucoma patients

Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology

Volumn 40, Issue 4, 2012, Pages

  Vincent, Stephen J ^a   Vincent, Roslyn A ^b   Shields, David ^e   Lee, Graham A ^b,c,d  

^a QUEENSLAND UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Australia)

^b City Eye Centre   (Australia)

^c ROYAL BRISBANE AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL   (Australia)

^d UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

^e ViewMachine Corporation   (United States)

Author keywords

Goldmann applanation tonometer; Intraocular pressure; Non contact tonometer; Rebound tonometer; Self tonometry

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; FEMALE; GLAUCOMA; GOLDMANN APPLANATION TONOMETRY; HUMAN; INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NON CONTACT TONOMETRY; OCULOPLETHYSMOGRAPHY; PRESSURE MEASUREMENT; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; REBOUND TONOMETRY; TONOMETER;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ANTIHYPERTENSIVE AGENTS; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; FEMALE; GLAUCOMA; HUMANS; INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; TONOMETRY, OCULAR; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84862571055     PISSN: 14426404     EISSN: 14429071     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1442-9071.2011.02670.x     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Fernandes P, Diaz-Rey JA, Queiros A etal. Comparison of the ICare rebound tonometer with the Goldmann tonometer in a normal population. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2005; 25: 436-40.
2. Jorge J, Fernandes P, Queiros A etal. Comparison of the IOPen and iCare rebound tonometers with the Goldmann tonometer in a normal population. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2010; 30: 108-12.
3. Poostchi A, Mitchell R, Nicholas S etal. The iCare rebound tonometer: comparisons with Goldmann tonometry, and influence of central corneal thickness. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol 2009; 37: 687-91.
4. Eichenbaum KD, Mezej M, Eichenbaum JW. Comparing dynamic contour tonometry to Goldmann and hand-held tonometry in normal, ocular hypertension, and glaucoma populations. Ann Ophthalmol (Skokie) 2007; 39: 41-9.
5. Lanza M, Borrelli M, De Bernardo M etal. Corneal parameters and difference between goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry in normal eyes. J Glaucoma 2008; 17: 460-4.
6. Realini T, Weinreb RN, Hobbs G. Correlation of intraocular pressure measured with goldmann and dynamic contour tonometry in normal and glaucomatous eyes. J Glaucoma 2009; 18: 119-23.
7. Kontiola AI. A new induction-based impact method for measuring intraocular pressure. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 2000; 78: 142-5.
8. Kontiola A. A new electromechanical method for measuring intraocular pressure. Doc Ophthalmol 1996; 93: 265-76.
9. Luce DA. Determining in vivo biomechanical properties of the cornea with an ocular response analyzer. J Cataract Refract Surg 2005; 31: 156-62.
10. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986; 1: 307-10.
11. Moreno-Montanes J, Gosende I, Caire J, Garcia-Granero M. Comparation of the new rebound tonometer IOPen and the Goldmann tonometer, and their relationship to corneal properties. Eye 2011; 25: 50-6.
12. Rehnman JB, Martin L. Comparison of rebound and applanation tonometry in the management of patients treated for glaucoma or ocular hypertension. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2008; 28: 382-6.
13. Asrani S, Chatterjee A, Wallace DK etal. Evaluation of the ICare rebound tonometer as a home intraocular pressure monitoring device. J Glaucoma 2011; 20: 74-9.
14. Abraham LM, Epasinghe NC, Selva D, Casson R. Comparison of the ICare rebound tonometer with the Goldmann applanation tonometer by experienced and inexperienced tonometrists. Eye 2008; 22: 503-6.
15. Chui WS, Lam A, Chen D, Chiu R. The influence of corneal properties on rebound tonometry. Ophthalmology 2008; 115: 80-4.
16. Munkwitz S, Elkarmouty A, Hoffmann EM etal. Comparison of the iCare rebound tonometer and the Goldmann applanation tonometer over a wide IOP range. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2008; 246: 875-9.
17. Pakrou N, Gray T, Mills R etal. Clinical comparison of the Icare tonometer and Goldmann applanation tonometry. J Glaucoma 2008; 17: 43-7.
18. Ehrlich JR, Haseltine S, Shimmyo M, Radcliffe NM. Evaluation of agreement between intraocular pressure measurements using Goldmann applanation tonometry and Goldmann correlated intraocular pressure by Reichert's ocular response analyser. Eye 2010; 24: 1555-60.
19. Renier C, Zeyen T, Fieuws S etal. Comparison of ocular response analyzer, dynamic contour tonometer and Goldmann applanation tonometer. Int Ophthalmol 2010; 30: 651-9.
20. Jorge JM, Gonzalez-Meijome JM, Queiros A etal. Correlations between corneal biomechanical properties measured with the ocular response analyzer and ICare rebound tonometry. J Glaucoma 2008; 17: 442-8.
21. Pekmezci M, Chang ST, Wilson BS, Gordon MO, Bhorade AM. Effect of measurement order between right and left eyes on intraocular pressure measurement. Arch Ophthalmol 2011; 129: 276-81.