Three portable tonometers, the TGDc-01, the ICARE and the Tonopen XL, compared with each other and with Goldmann applanation tonometry*

Longitudinal Change of Cup to Disc Ratio in Premature Infants with Enlarged Cup to Disc Ratio and Normal Intraocular Pressure

PURPOSE

To evaluate the longitudinal change of cup to disc ratio (CDR) in premature infants with enlarged CDR and normal intraocular pressure (IOP).

METHODS

This retrospective, observational study included 283 eyes of 283 premature infants at single center. Infants were divided into enlarged CDR and control groups. Data on demographics, gestational age (GA), birth weight (BW), vertical cup to disc ratio (vCDR), IOP, and corneal diameter were analyzed.

RESULTS

Of the 283 patients, 38 (13.4%) and 245 (86.6%) were in the enlarged CDR and control groups, respectively. In the enlarged CDR group, the vCDR and baseline IOP was 0.63 ± 0.12 and 12.7 ± 2.2 mmHg, respectively. In the control group, the vCDR and baseline IOP was 0.18 ± 0.05 and 10.9 ± 1.7 mmHg, respectively. The IOP at a GA of 40 weeks and at 1 and 2 years of age were significantly lower than that at baseline. The differences in vCDR between baseline and each follow-up visit were not significant. vCDR was negatively correlated with GA and BW; however, these correlations were not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

The vCDR did not significantly change up to age of 2 years of age in premature infants with enlarged CDR and normal IOP. However, close follow-up is needed until other reliable glaucoma examinations, such as optical coherence tomography and visual fields, can be possible.

Reliability of Refraction, Keratometry, and Intraocular Pressure Measurements with an Automated All-in-one Device

SIGNIFICANCE

This study explores the reliability of TonoRef II (Nidek, Tokyo, Japan), which represents a simple tool to obtain rapid refractometry and tonometry measurements. The present device demonstrates very high repeatability of refraction and intraocular pressure (IOP) readings as compared with subjective measurements and a higher concordance of IOP readings to Goldmann application tonometry (GAT).

PURPOSE

This study aimed to evaluate the repeatability of measurements acquired with the Autorefractometer/Keratometer/Tonometer TonoRef II and assess their agreement to subjective measurements and readings of other established devices.

METHODS

In a cross-sectional study, 54 eyes of 54 healthy subjects were enrolled. Each subject underwent five measurements with the TonoRef II, three measurements with the Canon RK-F1 Autorefractor Keratometer (Canon Europe NV, Amstelveen, the Netherlands), three IOP measurements with the Canon TX-F Noncontact Tonometer (Canon Inc., Tokyo, Japan), three measurements with GAT, and a thorough subjective refraction. Repeatability coefficient (r), intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and Bland-Altman plots were used to evaluate repeatability of readings and agreement to the subjective values.

RESULTS

TonoRef II showed high repeatability (ICC >0.9) in all parameters tested (sphere, r = 0.157; cylinder, r = 0.196; IOP, r = 2.653). A strong correlation was found between TonoRef and Canon instruments (P < .001 in all parameters). Mean differences and limits of agreement (mean ± 1.96 standard deviation) were -0.01 ± 0.69 D, -0.11 ± 0.7 D, and 2.1 ± 3.4 mmHg for sphere, cylinder, and IOP, respectively. Both autorefractors achieved a very good to excellent agreement to the values obtained with the subjective refraction for most of the parameters tested, without any significant difference to each other (P > .05). Intraocular pressure measurements of TonoRef II showed higher agreement to the GAT values compared with those obtained with the Canon tonometer (ICC, 0.9114 and 0.7002, respectively; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Intraocular pressure and refraction readings acquired with TonoRef II demonstrate very high repeatability and agreement to the subjective measurements. Regarding IOP evaluation, TonoRef II shows higher concordance to GAT compared with another established noncontact tonometer.

Visual Status in a Portuguese Population with Intellectual Disability

BACKGROUND

Neurosensory deprivation associated with vision is a well-known fact in people with intellectual disability (ID). This work aims to report the visual status of a population with ID in Portugal.

METHODS

A vision screening protocol was conducted during two Special Olympics events. The vision protocol included personal medical history, ocular health evaluation, and clinical measures, such as visual acuity (VA), binocular vision, colour vision, refractive error, and intraocular pressure. This protocol was administered to 134 subjects.

RESULTS

Half of the subjects reported that they had never attended or they did not remember having attended a previous eye exam. Additionally, 10% of them had not attended an eye exam in the immediate past three years. Half the subjects failed the VA test and 13% presented moderate Visual Impairment (VI) (VA worse than 0.5 logMAR in the best eye). Manifest ocular deviation was found in 25% of the subjects and the most common ocular health dysfunction conditions were conjunctiva hyperaemia, meibomian gland dysfunction, and lens anomalies. Refractive error correction allowed a reduction in the level of moderate VI to 3.7%.

CONCLUSIONS

The population analysed showed a poor eye care attendance rate and vision-related conditions are in agreement with previous reports. The development of national strategies to promote the awareness for routine eye care in people with ID and improving accessibility to eye care services may mitigate many of the most prevalent conditions encountered.

Correlation of ocular rigidity with intraocular pressure spike after intravitreal injection of bevacizumab in exudative retinal disease

BACKGROUND/AIMS

To evaluate the non-invasive measurement of ocular rigidity (OR), an important biomechanical property of the eye, as a predictor of intraocular pressure (IOP) elevation after anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) intravitreal injection (IVI).

METHODS

Subjects requiring IVI of anti-VEGF for a pre-existing retinal condition were enrolled in this prospective cross-sectional study. OR was assessed in 18 eyes of 18 participants by measurement of pulsatile choroidal volume change using video-rate optical coherence tomography, and pulsatile IOP change using dynamic contour tonometry. IOP was measured using Tono-Pen XL before and immediately following the injection and was correlated with OR.

RESULTS

The average increase in IOP following IVI was 19±9 mm Hg, with a range of 7-33 mm Hg. The Spearman correlation coefficient between OR and IOP elevation following IVI was 0.796 (p<0.001), showing higher IOP elevation in more rigid eyes. A regression line was also calculated to predict the IOP spike based on the OR coefficient, such that IOP spike=664.17 mm Hg·µL×OR + 4.59 mm Hg.

CONCLUSION

This study shows a strong positive correlation between OR and acute IOP elevation following IVI. These findings indicate that the non-invasive measurement of OR could be an effective tool in identifying patients at risk of IOP spikes following IVI.

Comparison of the corrected intraocular pressure by tonopachy with that of Goldmann applanation tonometry in normal and glaucomatous patients

Purpose:

To compare corrected intraocular pressure (IOP) by tonopachy with that of Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) in normal and glaucomatous patients.

Methods:

In this cross-sectional study, IOP and central corneal thickness (CCT) were measured in 426 eyes (213 normal eyes and 213 glaucomatous eyes) of 426 patients by tonopachy followed by GAT and ultrasound pachymetry. IOP was corrected for CCT by in-built formula in tonopachy and Ehlers correction factor for Goldmann tonometer. Limits of agreements were assessed using Bland–Altman plots. Intraclass correlation coefficient was calculated to estimate the absolute agreement between single and average measurements of IOP and CCT of tonopachy with that of Goldmann tonometer and ultrasound pachymetry respectively.

Results:

Mean corrected IOP measured with tonopachy and GAT in glaucomatous eyes was 17.63 ± 5.04 mmHg and 19.42 ± 5.83 mmHg, and in controls it was 13.4 ± 2.5 mmHg and 16.2 ± 3.1 mmHg, respectively. Limits of agreement ranged from –4.63 to +9.25 mmHg for total population (mean = 2.31), ˗6.01 to +9.59 mmHg (mean = 1.79) for glaucoma group and ˗2.99 to +8.65 mmHg (mean = 2.83) for controls. Intraclass correlation coefficient for IOP measurement between tonopachy and Goldmann tonometer was 0.84 for total population, 0.85 for glaucoma group, and 0.63 for controls, respectively.

Conclusion:

Corrected IOP obtained by tonopachy showed moderate agreement with GAT and it is more in glaucoma patients than controls. Thus, tonopachy can be used as a screening tool, but cannot replace GAT.

Icare® rebound tonometers: review of their characteristics and ease of use

The rebound tonometer has a unique mechanism for measuring intraocular pressure (IOP) and has become popular worldwide due to its ease of use. The most notable advantages are the lack of an air-puff and need for topical anesthesia, ease of operation and transport, and the ability to use it with children. Four rebound tonometers (Icare® TA01i, Icare PRO, Icare HOME, and Icare ic100) are currently available for clinical examination. It is important to understand the characteristics of each tonometer and select the most appropriate one because the IOP values and the purpose of measurement are different. In this review, with the goal of improving the understanding of a range of tonometers, the issues with each device are discussed.

Effect of prolonged supine position on the intraocular pressure in patients with obstructive sleep apnea syndrome

PURPOSE

Obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS) patients are at risk of glaucoma but the risk increases if they have higher intraocular pressure (IOP) while sleeping. We aim to evaluate the postural effect of upright and prolong supine positions on IOP in these patients.

METHODS

This is a cross-sectional study involving 27 patients with symptoms of OSAS seen at a tertiary institutional center and 25 normal controls performed between June 2015 and June 2016. All patients and controls underwent a polysomnography (PSG) test and were diagnosed with OSAS based on the apnea-hypopnea index (AHI). Patients are those with OSAS symptoms and had AHI > 5, whereas controls are staffs from the ophthalmology clinic without clinical criteria for OSAS and had PSG result of AHI < 5. IOP was measured 10 min after sitting, immediately and at 30 min on supine position and immediately after resuming sitting position. The main outcome measures were the changes in mean IOP in different positions.

RESULTS

The increase in mean IOP when changing from sitting to supine position was significantly higher in OSAS patients in both the right eye (RE) (1.01 ± 1.14 vs 0.44 ± 0.41 mmHg, p = 0.033) and left eye (LE) (1.20 ± 1.26 vs 0.48 ± 0.62 mmHg, p = 0.044). After 30 min supine, the IOP in OSAS patients showed a further increase in IOP than controls (RE 1.20 ± 1.79 vs 0.12 ± 0.66 mmHg, p = 0.001 and LE 0.59 ± 2.00 vs 0.15 ± 0.78 mmHg, p = 0.246). Higher IOP when sitting post supine is associated with higher IOP on supine position.

CONCLUSION

IOP increase is significantly more in OSAS patients on prolong supine position.

Tonometers-which one should I use?

Although several factors are known to play a role in the development and progression of glaucoma, intraocular pressure (IOP) remains the only modifiable risk factor. Medical and surgical treatments for glaucoma both aim to reduce IOP to minimize disease progression. Tonometry is therefore an essential element of the ophthalmological exam. There are several types of tonometers available currently. These range from well-established instruments that have been in clinical use for decades to new devices, which are the result of recent technological advances. The various instruments have advantages and disadvantages that affect their suitability for a given setting, purpose, and patient population. In this review, we aim to describe the most commonly available tonometers today along with their advantages, disadvantages, and applicability.

Course of Intraocular Pressure after Intravitreal Injection of 0.05 mL Ranibizumab (Lucentis®)

Purpose

This prospective study examines the changes in short-term intraocular pressure (IOP) in patients with wet age-related macular degeneration (AMD) receiving intravitreal injections of 0.05 mL ranibizumab (Lucentis®) in a supine position.

Methods

A total of 45 eyes (45 patients, 16 M, 29 F, mean age: 78 y) received intravitreal ranibizumab injections for treatment of wet AMD (0.05 mL = 0.5 mg). The IOP was measured by Schiötz tonometry immediately preoperatively and postoperatively, and also after 3 and 10 minutes in a supine position. No history of glaucoma was present.

Results

The mean preoperative IOP was 22.4±5.5 mmHg in supine position. Immediately after the injection, IOP increased to 47.9±15.1 (range 23–82, p<0.001), with 32 eyes (71.1%) >40 and 19 eyes (42.2%) >50 mmHg. The mean difference between preoperative IOP and immediately after the injection was +25.5±13.6 mmHg. IOP decreased spontaneously by the first 3 minutes after operation by 12.6±6.0 mmHg and after 10 minutes by 21±9.4 mmHg. The mean difference between preoperative IOP and 10 minutes postoperatively was +4.6±7.0 mmHg (range: −9.3 to +25.9 mmHg, p<0.001). Eyes without a subconjunctival reflux had a higher increase in IOP than eyes with any reflux (p<0.001).

Conclusions

IOP increased significantly in a considerable number of patients after intravitreal ranibizumab injections. A rapid and spontaneous decline was observed in the majority of cases. If there is no subconjunctival reflux after the injection, the increase in IOP is higher than in eyes with any back-flow under the conjunctiva.

Comparison of intraocular pressure as measured by three different non-contact tonometers and goldmann applanation tonometer for non-glaucomatous subjects

BACKGROUND

To compare the measurement of intraocular pressure (IOP) among the three different non-contact tonometers (NCT) and the Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT) for non-glaucomatous subjects.

METHODS

In 52 eyes of 52 non-glaucomatous subjects, IOP was measured sequentially with the Canon TX-20P, the Nidek NT-530P, the Topcon CT-1P, and the GAT at the same time. We evaluated the IOP-measurement agreement among the tonometers as well as the factors affecting the measurements.

RESULTS

A significant positive correlation was shown between the IOP values obtained with GAT and each NCT. The Canon TX-20P showed statistically the most significant agreement with the GAT (ICC 0.906, 95% CI 0.837-0.946). In an analysis of the Bland-Altman plots, the Canon TX-20P also showed the largest mean bias (1.38 mmHg) but the narrowest limits of agreement (LoA) (95% LoA; ± 3.43 mmHg). The Topcon CT-1P showed the smallest mean bias (0.48 mmHg) but the widest LoA (95% LoA; ± 4.16 mmHg). The Topcon CT-1P and Nidek NT-530P both showed a significantly positive correlation between increasing central corneal thickness (CCT) and increasing IOP.

CONCLUSION

There was a statistically significant correlation between each of the three different NCT and the GAT measurements. IOP measured with the Canon TX-20P and Topcon CT-1P tended to be higher, and with the Nidek NT-530P lower, than with the GAT. Practitioners need to know the properties of their own NCTs and their respective measurement tendencies.

Prospective Comparative Analysis of 4 Different Intraocular Pressure Measurement Techniques and Their Effects on Pressure Readings

PURPOSE

To compare intraocular pressure (IOP) measurement using the Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) without fluorescein, with fluorescein strips, with fluorescein droplets, and IOP measurement with Tono-Pen Avia (TPA).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a prospective comparative clinical analysis. It was performed in clinical practice. The study population consisted of 40 volunteer patients, 1 eye per patient. All patients who were 18 years and older having routine ophthalmological examination were eligible to participate. Active corneal abrasions and/or ulcers, previous glaucoma surgery, or prostheses interfering with GAT measurement were excluded. GAT IOP was measured first without fluorescein, then with fluorescein strip, then with fluorescein droplet, and finally with the TPA device. The main outcome measure was central corneal IOP.

RESULTS

Mean±SD IOP measurements for GAT without fluorescein, with fluorescein strip, with fluorescein droplet, and for TPA groups were 12.65±3.01, 14.70±2.82, 15.78±2.64, and 16.33±3.08 mm Hg, respectively. Repeated-measures analysis of variance corrected with the Greenhouse-Geisser estimate ([Latin Small Letter Open E]=0.732) showed that measuring technique had a significant effect on IOP measurements (F2.20,85.59=34.66, P<0.001). The pairwise post hoc testing showed statistically significant mean differences (P≤0.001) between all techniques except when GAT with fluorescein droplet was compared with TPA (P=0.222). The Bland-Altman analyses showed 95% limits of agreement maximum potential discrepancies in measurement ranging from 5.89 mm Hg in the GAT with fluorescein strip versus droplet compared with 11.83 mm Hg in the GAT with fluorescein strip versus TPA comparison.

CONCLUSIONS

IOP measurement technique significantly impacted the values obtained. The ophthalmologist should ensure consistent measurement technique to minimize variability when following patients.

The measurement of intraocular pressure over positive soft contact lenses by rebound tonometry

PURPOSE

To investigate if the accuracy of intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements using rebound tonometry over disposable hydrogel (etafilcon A) contact lenses (CL) is affected by the positive power of the CLs.

METHODS

The experimental group comprised 26 subjects, (8 male, 18 female). IOP measurements were undertaken on the subjects' right eyes in random order using a Rebound Tonometer (ICare). The CLs had powers of +2.00D and +6.00D. Measurements were taken over each contact lens and also before and after the CLs had been worn.

RESULTS

The IOP measure obtained with both CLs was significantly lower compared to the value without CLs (t test; p<0.001) but no significant difference was found between the two powers of CLs.

CONCLUSIONS

Rebound tonometry over positive hydrogel CLs leads to a certain degree of IOP underestimation. This result did not change for the two positive lenses used in the experiment, despite their large difference in power and therefore in lens thickness. Optometrists should bear this in mind when measuring IOP with the rebound tonometer over plus power contact lenses.

Comparison of intraocular pressure measurements with different contact tonometers in young healthy persons

AIM

To analyze the correlation of Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT), I-Care tonometer and Tono-Pen tonometer results in young healthy persons, and to investigate the influence of central corneal thickness (CCT) on intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements recorded with these tonometers.

METHODS

We conducted a pilot clinical study in 78 eyes of 78 subjects aged 22-28 years old (44 women and 34 men; mean age 23.8±1.19y). IOP was measured using GAT, I-Care and Tono-Pen tonometers, followed by measurements of CCT. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 20.0.

RESULTS

The mean IOPs and standard deviation (±SD) for GAT, I-Care and Tono-Pen were 15.62±2.281 mm Hg, 16.29±2.726 mm Hg and 16.32±2.393 mm Hg, respectively. The mean CCT was 555.15±29.648 µm. Clear positive correlations between GAT and I-Care, GAT and Tono-Pen, and I-Care and Tono-Pen tonometers were found (r=0.867, P<0.001; r=0.861, P<0.001; r=0.915, P<0.001, respectively). In comparison between devices, Bland-Altman analysis showed a significant mean difference (MD) in the measurements by GAT and I-Care of -0.679 mm Hg and by GAT and Tono-Pen of -0.705 mm Hg ( P<0.001), but there was no significant difference between I-Care and Tono-Pen ( P>0.05). Both non-gold standard tonometers were affected by CCT; that is, both I-Care and Tono-Pen tonometer values were significantly higher with higher CCT means (>555 µm; MD=-1.282, P<0.001; MD=-0.949, P<0.001, respectively) compared with GAT.

CONCLUSION

Both I-Care and Tono-Pen tonometers overestimated IOP compared with the GAT values. Either the I-Care or Tono-Pen tonometer could be used instead of GAT because there was no significant difference between their results. Higher CCT values (>555 µm) were associated with overestimated IOP values.

Detecting IOP Fluctuations in Glaucoma Patients

Lowering intraocular pressure (IOP) remains the guiding principle of glaucoma management. Although IOP is the only treatable risk factor, its 24-hour behavior is poorly understood. Current glaucoma management usually relies on single IOP measurements during clinic hours, even though IOP is a dynamic parameter with rhythms dependent on individual patients. It has further been shown that most glaucoma patients have their highest IOP measurements outside clinic hours. The fact that these IOP peaks go largely undetected may explain why certain patients progress in their disease despite treatment. Nevertheless, single IOP measurements have determined all major clinical guidelines regarding glaucoma treatment. Other potentially informative parameters, such as fluctuations in IOP and peak IOP, have been neglected, and effects of IOP-lowering interventions on such measures are largely unknown. Continuous 24-hour IOP monitoring has been an interest for more than 50 years, but only recent technological advances have provided clinicians with a device for such an endeavor. This review discusses current uses and shortcomings of current measurement techniques, and provides an overview on current and future methods for 24-hour IOP assessment. It may be possible to incorporate continuous IOP monitoring into clinical practice, potentially to reduce glaucoma-related vision loss.

[Rebound tonometry after vitreoretinal surgery]

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to analyze the practicability and comparability of the Icare rebound tonometer (RT) versus the Schiötz indentation tonometer (SIT) and the Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT) for measuring intraocular pressure (IOP) in patients after pars plana vitrectomy (PPV).

METHODS

A total of 100 eyes from 100 patients who underwent vitreoretinal surgery in the Department of Ophthalmology, University of Cologne were included in this prospective analysis. The IOP was measured using RT preoperatively, on the day of surgery and 2 days after surgery, using SIT on the day of surgery and GAT preoperatively and 2 days after surgery. For the evaluation eyes were divided into subgroups with respect to the endotamponade selected and the IOP level.

RESULTS

The mean preoperative IOP for all enrolled eyes was 15.4 ± 8.0 mmHg for RT and 16.1 ± 7.9 mmHg for GAT. Bland-Altman analysis revealed a bias between RT and GAT of - 0.6 mmHg. Bland-Altman analysis for the postoperative course of all eyes revealed a bias of 3.0 mmHg between RT and SIT on the day of surgery and no bias between RT and GAT in the further postoperative follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Rebound tonometry seems to provide precise IOP values after vitreoretinal surgery. Divergence from SIT values on the day of surgery is presumably due to a general tendency of SIT to underestimate IOP values. Therefore, RT can be used in the clinical routine after vitreoretinal surgery as an alternative to GAT.

Intra-ocular pressure measurements using the Ocular Response Analyser and ICare tonometer: A comparison

The accurate measurement of intra-ocular pressure (IOP) is an important procedure in the detection and treatment of glaucoma. The Ocular Response Analyser (ORA) and the ICare rebound tonometer are two recent additions to the instruments available to eye care practitioners for the measurement of IOP. The present study investigated whether the ORA and the ICare tonometer can be used interchangeably. Twenty-eight subjects had three measures of IOP taken using the two instruments. The ORA provides two different measures of IOP – Goldmann and cornea compensated IOP – whilst the ICare tonometer provides IOP only. The results of this study suggest that only the ORA Goldmann and ICare IOP measures are comparable. In general, it is advisable not to use the ORA and ICare tonometers interchangeably.

Fundamentals and Advances in Tonometry

According to the World Health Organization, glaucoma is the leading cause of irreversible blindness worldwide. Although intraocular pressure (IOP) is not considered any more to be a defining feature of the disease, its lowering remains the only treatment option for glaucoma. Therefore, accurate and precise measurement of IOP is the cornerstone of glaucoma. Intraocular pressure is a highly dynamic physiological parameter with individual circadian rhythms. The main limitation of current tonometry methods remains the static and mostly office-based nature of their measurements. This review provides a brief historical overview on tonometry and discusses current tonometry instruments. In recent years, approaches to 24-hour IOP monitoring have been introduced, and there is hope that they may become part of routine clinical management in the future.

Clinical use of a new position-independent rebound tonometer

PURPOSE

To compare intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements obtained by rebound tonometry (Icare PRO tonometer), applanation tonometry (Goldmann and Perkins tonometry), and dynamic contour tonometry in the upright and the supine positions, and to investigate the influence of axial length and central corneal thickness.

METHODS

Ninety-nine right eyes of 99 patients with glaucoma or suspect for glaucoma, admitted to our department between November 2010 and January 2011 to obtain an IOP profile including supine measurements, were included in our study. IOP measurements were obtained in an upright position using an Icare PRO rebound (RTPRO), a Goldmann applanation (GAT), and a Pascal dynamic contour tonometer (DCT). In the supine position, IOP measurements were taken using the RTPRO and a Perkins hand-held applanation tonometer (PAT). The means and SDs for all tonometers were compared. Agreement between the tonometers was calculated using the Bland-Altman method.

RESULTS

The mean IOPs obtained in the upright position were 17.7 ± 8.0 mm Hg (RTPRO), 17.6 ± 7.8 mm Hg (GAT), and 19.9 ± 6.6 mm Hg (DCT). Correlation analysis of these data indicated a good correlation between IOP readings obtained using RTPRO and GAT (r=0.951; P<0.001), and RTPRO and DCT (r=0.897; P<0.001). Bland-Altman analysis revealed mean differences (bias) between RTPRO and GAT, and between RTPRO and DCT of 0.1 mm Hg and -1.8 mm Hg, with 95% limits of agreement of -3.6 to 3.8 mm Hg and -7.3 to 3.6 mm Hg, respectively. In the supine position, the mean IOPs were 19.2 ± 6.4 mm Hg using the RTPRO and 19.6 ± 6.2 mm Hg using the PAT.

CONCLUSIONS

Measurements obtained with the RTPRO, either in the upright or in the supine position, show good correlation and agreement with those provided by applanation and dynamic contour tonometry. The study was registered with the DRKS (German Clinical Trials Register; http://www.germanctr.de; DRKS00000581).

The impact of corneal edema on intraocular pressure measurements using goldmann applanation tonometry, Tono-Pen XL, iCare, and ORA: an in vitro model

PURPOSE

Among other corneal biomechanical properties, Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) has been shown to depend on corneal edema. New tonometry devices have been designed, such as the Tono-Pen XL, iCare, and ocular response analyzer (ORA), to measure the intraocular pressure (IOP) accurately. This study aims to investigate the influence of corneal edema on the accuracy of these IOP-measuring devices in an in vitro model.

METHODS

A model of an artificial anterior chamber was developed using a guided trephination system. Eight donor corneas not suitable for keratoplasty were clamped into this artificial anterior chamber. All corneas showed signs of stromal edema. Intracameral pressure (ICP) was adjusted manometrically to 10, 20, 30, 40, and 50 mm Hg. The central corneal thickness (CCT) was determined by ultrasonic pachymetry. For each manometrically defined ICP, tonometry was performed using the iCare, Tono-Pen XL, GAT, and ORA.

RESULTS

The mean CCT increased from 616.1±29.6 µm to 626.9±36.1 µm. At 10 mm Hg, GAT yielded a higher ICP than those manometrically adjusted (10.4±3.3 mm Hg); at all other ICP levels, GAT yielded lower ICP levels than those adjusted. The Tono-Pen XL and iCare showed the greatest difference at 10 mm Hg, with the Tono-Pen XL yielding a value of 14.0±4.0 mm Hg and the iCare yielding a value of 12.5±2.6 mm Hg. All other results of the 2 devices fell within a range of ±2 mm Hg from the adjusted ICP. The ORA provided accurate results only at "physiological" ICP levels with a maximum difference of 2.6 mm Hg at 30 mm Hg. At higher ICP levels, corneal hysteresis decreased significantly with increasing ICP. None of the measurement devices revealed a statistically relevant dependence on CCT in this experimental setting.

CONCLUSIONS

The Tono-Pen XL and the iCare yielded the most accurate ICP values across all the adjusted ICP values. This may be because of their relatively small contact area with the cornea and, consequently, greater independence from corneal biomechanical properties. The ORA yielded accurate measurement results only at physiological ICP levels. As anticipated, GAT underestimated ICP. The Tono-Pen XL and the iCare should therefore be used to determine IOP in patients suffering from corneal edema, such as bullous keratopathy or Fuchs endothelial dystrophy.

Intraocular pressure of supine patients using four portable tonometers

PURPOSE

To evaluate the congruity of intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements from supine patients, which were obtained using four portable tonometers.

METHODS

Intraocular pressure measurements were obtained from the right eye of 72 supine patients. We used the iCare (Tiolat Oy, Helsinki, Finland) rebound tonometer, the Diaton (BICOM Inc., Long Beach, NY) transpalpebral tonometer, the Tonopen XL (Reichert inc., Depew, NY), and a Kowa hand-held applanation tonometer (HAT; Kowa Company, Ltd., Nagoya, Japan). Relationships between mean IOPs were evaluated using Pearson correlation coefficients, and the mean differences between tonometers, using one-way analysis of variance followed by Tukey-Kramer post-hoc analysis. Levels of agreement were evaluated using Bland-Altman analysis.

RESULTS

The mean IOPs (mean ± SD) were 18.2 ± 3.5 mm Hg for iCare, 14.8 ± 3.4 mm Hg for Diaton, 16.7 ± 3.7 mm Hg for Tonopen XL, and 16.8 ± 2.8 mm Hg for Kowa HAT. Pearson correlation coefficients between iCare, Tonopen XL, and Kowa HAT ranged from 0.382 to 0.577, whereas those between Diaton and other tonometers ranged from 0.041 to 0.286. Post-hoc analysis indicated significant differences between all pairs except Tonopen XL and Kowa HAT. The mean difference between measurements from iCare and Diaton was 3.39 ± 3.39 mm Hg; iCare and Tonopen XL, 1.47 ± 3.52 mm Hg; iCare and Kowa HAT, 1.49 ± 2.90 mm Hg; Diaton and Tonopen XL, -1.93 ± 4.90 mm Hg; Diaton and Kowa HAT, -1.90 ± 4.15 mm Hg; and Tonopen XL and Kowa HAT, 0.02 ± 3.61 mm Hg. Computation of the width of the 95% limits of agreement resulted in a wide bias range when comparing Diaton with all tonometers. Relatively good agreements were observed between iCare, Tonopen XL, and HAT.

CONCLUSIONS

Intraocular pressure measurements obtained in a supine position by four portable tonometers were not interchangeable. Although iCare and Tonopen XL significantly overestimated IOP values in eyes with a higher IOP when compared with Kowa HAT, the agreements between iCare, Tonopen XL, and Kowa HAT were at clinically acceptable levels.

Short-term effect of standard automated perimetry testing on intraocular pressure in patients with open-angle glaucoma

Purpose. To evaluate the short-term effect of standard automated perimetry (SAP) testing on intraocular pressure (IOP) in patients with open-angle glaucoma (OAG). Methods. We tested 45 patients (71 eyes) with OAG that had stable IOP under medical treatment. IOP was measured four times using an iCare rebound tonometer (RBT) immediately before, immediately after, 10 minutes after, and 20 minutes after SAP testing. Logistic regression analyses were performed to determine the relationships among SAP test duration, mean deviation of the SAP result, type of glaucoma medications, patient age, and significant IOP change (exceeding 2 mmHg) from baseline IOP. Results. The mean baseline IOP was 13.29 ± 3.06 mmHg. Although IOP changes immediately and 20 minutes after SAP testing were not statistically significant, the IOP change 10 minutes after SAP testing (-0.57 ± 1.84 mmHg) was statistically significant. However, the changes were within the margin of error of the RBT. Test duration, mean deviation, patient age, and type of glaucoma medications did not have a significant influence on IOP change (all P > 0.14). Conclusions. IOP measured by RBT did not vary significantly after SAP testing in patients with OAG. It may be not necessary to reject IOP measured after SAP testing in patients with OAG.

Measurement of the difference in intraocular pressure between the sitting and lying body positions in healthy subjects: direct comparison of the Icare Pro with the Goldmann applanation tonometer, Pneumatonometer and Tonopen XL

BACKGROUND

Change in intraocular pressure is known to occur with body posture. Previously, markedly different estimations of this change were reported. The Icare Pro (Icare; Tiolat Oy, Helsinki, Finland) is designed to measure intraocular pressure with the subject supine. We compared the measurement of postural change in intraocular pressure obtained with this and 3 other tonometers: Goldmann applanation tonometer (CSO, Firenze, Italy), Pneumatonometer (Model 30, Reichert, Depew, NY, USA) and the Tonopen XL (Reichert).

DESIGN

Prospective comparative study.

PARTICIPANTS

Twenty-one healthy subjects.

METHODS

Intraocular pressure was measured in random order with four tonometers, first sitting then after 10 min of lying.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Average postural intraocular pressure change (mmHg) and the 95% limits of agreement for measuring postural intraocular pressure change between tonometers.

RESULTS

Average postural intraocular pressure change (lying minus sitting, mmHg) was measured highest with the Goldmann applanation tonometer (4.1 ± 2.6) and Pneumatonometer (3.9 ± 2.1), significantly lower with the Tonopen (0.9 ± 1.7) and was negative with the Icare (-0.9 ± 3.3). The 95% limits of agreement for measuring postural intraocular pressure change between Goldmann applanation tonometer and Icare, Pneumatonometer and Tonopen were -3.2-13.3, -6.4-6.9 and -2.8-9.4 mmHg, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Postural change in intraocular pressure was measured similarly, on average, with Goldmann applanation tonometer and Pneumatonometer, and much lower with Tonopen and Icare Pro. There was poor interdevice agreement in measuring this parameter. We observed high intersubject variability, suggesting the clinical importance of this measurement in the diagnosis and management of glaucoma.

Characterization of the thickness of different corneal zones in glaucoma: effect on dynamic contour, Goldmann and rebound tonometries

PURPOSE

To characterize five models of corneal thickness circular zoning in a sample of healthy controls and a sample of patients with primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) and to determine their effect on Goldmann (GAT), dynamic contour (DCT) and rebound tonometers (RT).

METHODS

The study participants were 122 controls and 129 cases. Five corneal thickness zoning models (A, B, C, D and E) were constructed. The partitioning pattern consisted of a circle centred at the corneal apex and several concentric rings, until the limbus; the contours of each ring followed the geometry of the corneal contour of each participant. In Model A, the central circle was 1 mm in diameter and five concentric rings were established. Mean was obtained for each zone for both samples and compared between them using a t-test. The effect on the tonometers of central cornel thickness (CCT) and mean thickness of the zones generated was determined through several linear regression models (one per tonometer and per sample).

RESULTS

According to a t-test, cases and controls differ in zones I [mean difference (MD): 17.93 μm], V (MD: 25.52 μm) and VI (MD: 31.78 μm) of model A (higher values in the cases sample). RT was affected by CCT (controls: B = 0.089; cases: B = 0.081). DCT was affected by zone IV of model A (controls: B = -0.029; cases: B = -0.012). GAT was affected by CCT (controls: B = 0.043; cases: B = 0.025) and zone III of model A (controls: B = -0.045; cases: B = -0.033).

CONCLUSION

Our results highlight the importance of the thickness of other regions of the cornea different from its main centre in discriminating between healthy controls and patients with POAG and in IOP measurements made using DCT, GAT and RT.

Reliability of the non-contact tono-pachymeter Tonopachy NT-530P in healthy eyes

BACKGROUND

Non-contact Tonopachy NT-530P (Nidek Co., LTD) provides intraocular pressure (IOP) and central corneal thickness (CCT) measurements. This study assesses the reliability and repeatability of its IOP measurements in young healthy adult subjects.

METHODS

IOP was determined in the right eye of 64 healthy patients using Tonopachy followed by the Canon TX-10 non-contact and Goldmann applanation (GAT) tonometers. Tonopachy IOP measurements were corrected (Tonopachy-C) or not (Tonopachy-NC) by the instrument for central corneal thickness. Central corneal thickness measurements provided by Tonopachy were also used to correlate (Pearson's coefficient) central corneal thickness with the GAT and Canon TX-10 IOPs. Repeatability of Tonopachy and GAT was assessed in the right eye of 31 subjects in two separate sessions one week apart. Differences between pairs of instruments and between sessions were determined using Bland-Altman plots. The coefficient of repeatability was calculated as the 95% limits of agreement (LoA) of differences between the two sessions.

RESULTS

Tonopachy-NC, Tonopachy-C, Canon TX-10 and the Goldmann tonometers showed a mean IOP of 14.62, 15.64, 15.02 and 14.68 mmHg, respectively. Tonopachy-NC and Canon TX-10 readings did not differ significantly from the Goldmann (p > 0.05), with close agreement with both tonometers (GAT versus Tonopachy-NC: -3.84 to 3.96 mmHg; Goldmann versus Canon TX-10: -4.75 to 4.07 mmHg). Tonopachy-C readings differed significantly from Goldmann (mean difference -0.96 mmHg, p = 0.001, LoA from -5.09 to 3.17). Coefficients of repeatability were ± 3.70, ± 3.14 and ± 3.33 mmHg for GAT, Tonopachy-NC and Tonopachy-C, respectively. Central corneal thickness measured with Tonopachy was 530.42 ± 34.96 μm. There was a significant correlation between central corneal thickness and IOP for all tonometers except Tonopachy-C.

CONCLUSIONS

Reasonable agreement was observed between the Goldmann and Tonopachy. This instrument provides reliable and repeatable IOP measurements not influenced by central corneal thickness. The Tonopachy-NC and Canon TX-10 offer similar reliability compared to the Goldmann applanation tonometer in a young normotensive population.

Comparison of handheld rebound tonometry with Goldmann applanation tonometry in children with glaucoma: a cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To test agreement of two methods to measure intraocular pressure (IOP): rebound tonometry (RBT) and gold standard Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) in children with glaucoma.

DESIGN

Observational prospective cohort study.

SETTING

Tertiary paediatric glaucoma clinic at a single centre.

PARTICIPANTS

102 individuals attending a paediatric glaucoma clinic, mean (SD) age 11.85 (3.17), of whom 53 were male.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Intraocular pressure, central corneal thickness, child preference for measurement method.

RESULTS

Limits of agreement for intraobserver and interobserver were, respectively, (-2.71, 2.98) mm Hg and (-5.75, 5.97) mm Hg. RBT frequently gave higher readings than GAT and the magnitude of disagreement depend on the level of IOP being assessed. Differences of 10 mm Hg were not uncommon. RBT was the preferred method for 70% of children.

CONCLUSIONS

There is poor agreement between RBT and GAT in children with glaucoma. RBT frequently and significantly overestimates IOP. However, 'normal' RBT readings are likely to be accurate and may spare children an examination under anaesthesia (EUA). High RBT readings should prompt the practitioner to use another standard method of IOP measurement if possible, or consider the RBT measurement in the context of clinical findings before referring the child to a specialist clinic or considering EUA.

Intraocular pressure in a cohort of healthy eastern European schoolchildren: variations in method and corneal thickness

Background

Intraocular pressure (IOP) in the developing eye of a child is not always easy to measure and there is no technique that is known to be the most accurate for the young eye. Measurements are needed on many cohorts of children with different tonometers to determine how the values correlate between instruments, whether corneal parameters affect readings and whether correlations between age and IOP values can be discerned. The aim of this study was to undertake a comparative analysis of three different tonometers on a group of healthy children to see whether differences exist and whether these may be related to central corneal thickness and/or radius of curvature. In addition, the study adds to the relatively small body of literature on IOP in the growing eye which will collectively allow trends to be identified and ultimately norms to be established.

Methods

IOP was measured on 115 eyes in a group of Polish children, aged between 5–17 years (mean ± standard deviation [SD] 11.3 ± 3.0 years) using three different tonometers: non-contact (NCT), the ICare and Goldmann applanation (GAT). Readings obtained were compared between instruments and with central corneal thickness and radius of curvature.

Results

The ICare tonometer provided statistically higher IOP values (16.9 ± 3.4 mmHg) than the GAT (14.7 ± 2.9 mmHg) regardless of corneal thickness and whether or not a correction factor was applied. A correlation was found between central corneal thickness (CCT) and IOP values obtained with all three tonometers but only the IOP values detected with the ICare tonometer showed a statistically significant correlation with radius of curvature (p < 0.004). No correlations with age or gender were found for IOP values measured with any of the instruments.

Conclusions

IOP measurements on children vary significantly between instruments and correlations are affected by the corneal thickness. Further studies on children are needed to determine which instrument is most appropriate and to derive a normative IOP scale for the growing eye.

Comparison of Tono-Pen and Goldmann applanation tonometers for measurement of intraocular pressure in healthy children

PURPOSE

To assess the agreement of intraocular pressure (IOP) measured with the Tono-Pen and the Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT) in normal children and adolescents.

METHODS

A total of 439 subjects from birth to <18 years of age without anterior segment anomalies or glaucoma had their IOP measured with the two instruments by separate, masked examiners in the office or under general anesthesia.

RESULTS

On average, the Tono-Pen measured values slightly lower than the GAT for IOP <11 mm Hg and slightly higher than the GAT for IOP >11 mm Hg in the office setting. Using the average of GAT and Tono-Pen IOPs to estimate the true IOP, the average difference (GAT - Tono-Pen) was 0.4 mm Hg at IOP of 10 mm Hg and -3.0 mm Hg at IOP of 20 mm Hg. The 95% limits of agreement on the average difference between instruments were ± 6.4 mm Hg in the office setting and ± 6.8 mm Hg under general anesthesia. Larger differences between instruments were found with younger age. Standard error of measurement with the Tono-Pen was 1.44 mm Hg and 1.82 mm Hg for the office and anesthesia settings, respectively. Thicker corneas were associated with higher IOP with both the GAT and the Tono-Pen.

CONCLUSIONS

In normal children, average differences between IOP measured by Tono-Pen and GAT were small, although there was substantial test-retest variability. Younger age was associated with larger average differences, as was higher IOP in the office setting.

Performance of the rebound, noncontact and Goldmann applanation tonometers in routine clinical practice

PURPOSE

To compare rebound tonometry (RBT) and noncontact tonometry (NCT) using Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) as reference.

METHODS

The study sample was comprised of 108 eyes of 108 subjects consecutively examined at a general ophthalmology clinic. The order of use of the three tonometers was randomized at the study outset. The difference between the methods was plotted against the mean to compare the tonometers. The hypothesis of zero bias was examined by a paired t-test and 95% limits of agreement (LoA) were also calculated. Differences with respect to GAT were assessed according to the international standard for ocular tonometers (ISO 8612).

RESULTS

Mean intraocular pressures (IOPs ± SD) obtained using the three instruments were GAT 17.5 ± 3.8 mmHg; RBT 18.5 ± 5.5 mmHg and NCT 17.4 ± 5.6 mmHg. The 95% LoA were from -7.9 to +7.7 mmHg for NCT-GAT and from -6.8 mmHg to +8.7 mmHg for RBT-GAT. A difference with respect to GAT under ± 1 mmHg was observed in 11.1% of the eyes measured by NCT and 18.5% of eyes measured by RBT. According to the IOP ranges established by the ISO 8612, differences from GAT measurements greater than ± 5 mmHg were always above the accepted level of 5%. Correlations between IOP and central corneal thickness (CCT) were significant for all three tonometers.

CONCLUSIONS

The rebound and noncontact tonometer behaved similarly when used to measure IOP taking GAT measurements as the reference standard. Neither tonometer fulfilled ISO 8612 requirements. Both were similarly influenced by CCT.

Home tonometry for management of pediatric glaucoma

PURPOSE

To use iCare rebound tonometry in the home setting for documentation of diurnal intraocular pressure (IOP) fluctuations in children.

DESIGN

Nonrandomized, prospective clinical study.

METHODS

Pediatric ophthalmology clinic patients were recruited between October 2009 and February 2010 who were able to cooperate with IOP measurement by iCare rebound tonometry and whose caregiver was willing and able to obtain iCare measurements at home. The child's IOP was measured first by iCare tonometry followed by a second method (Goldmann applanation [GAT]). The caregiver was instructed on the use of the iCare tonometer. The subject's IOP was measured by the caregiver at home at designated time periods for at least 2 consecutive days.

RESULTS

Seventeen children (17 eyes) with known or suspected glaucoma and 11 normal children were included. Excellent reliability was obtained by caregivers in 70% of iCare measurements. Mean difference between iCare and GAT in clinic was 2.0 ± 4.0 mm Hg, P = .08. Daily IOP fluctuation occurred in both subjects with glaucoma and normal subjects. In children with known or suspected glaucoma, relative peak and trough IOPs occurred in the early morning (45%) and late evening (43.5%), respectively. Comparison of the peak IOP measured at home vs in the clinic was >6 mm Hg in 5 of 16 subjects (31%) and affected glaucoma management in several subjects.

CONCLUSIONS

In selected children with glaucoma, home tonometry by iCare rebound tonometry was reliable, easily performed by caregivers, and well tolerated, and offered IOP information valuable in clinical management.

Comparing applanation tonometry and rebound tonometry in glaucomatous and ocular hypertensive eyes

PURPOSE

To describe Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT) and rebound tonometer (RT) agreement in measuring intraocular pressure (IOP) in glaucomatous and ocular hypertensive (OH) eyes and to evaluate central corneal thickness (CCT) influence on RT readings.

METHODS

A total of 347 eyes were enrolled and IOP measured between 9 and 11 am. Rebound tonometry was performed first (RT1), followed by 3 consecutive GAT measurements and by a second RT reading (RT2), within a 5-minute span. Mean IOP (±SD) values were compared by means of paired t-test. Agreement between GAT and RT1 (test 1) and RT2 (test 2) was evaluated with Bland-Altman method, whereas a linear function described the relationship between CCT and IOP taken with RT.

RESULTS

Mean IOP (±SD) taken with RT1, GAT, and RT2 was 18.1±4.3, 15.6±3.3, and 16.3±3.9 mmHg, respectively. Readings were within ±3 mmHg in 63.7% and 86.7% of eyes for test 1 and 2, respectively. A significant (p<0.001) proportional bias was noted on both tests (95% limits of agreement: -2.3/7.4 and -3.6/5.0 mmHg for test 1 and 2, respectively). Agreement between instruments decreased for increasing IOP. Rebound tonometry readings increased by 4.6 and 4.1 mmHg for RT1 and RT2, respectively, for each 100-µm CCT increase.

CONCLUSIONS

When used first, RT significantly overestimated IOP compared with GAT. Differences became clinically negligible when RT was used immediately after GAT. Repeated applanation tonometry may explain this observation. Agreement between instruments was acceptable for low IOP, but worsened with increasing IOP values. RT is significantly influenced by CCT. Goldmann applanation tonometer and RT should not be used interchangeably.

Validity and limits of the rebound tonometer (ICare®): clinical study

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the measurement of intraocular pressure (IOP) using a new induction/impact rebound tonometer (ICare®) compared with Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT). We also aimed to quantify the systematic and random errors (bias) of the 2 methods, to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of the ICare® tonometer in identifying patients with 21 mmHg or more measured with the GAT, and to study the influence of corneal thickness on IOP measurement with the 2 tonometers.

METHODS

We compared the IOP values obtained with the 2 instruments in 97 patients.

RESULTS

Analysis based on the Bland and Altman method revealed that the IOP values recorded with the ICare® tonometer were slightly higher than those obtained with the GAT. The estimated bias for right eye measurements was 0.78 mmHg with 95% limits of agreement ±3.55 mmHg. This overestimation, which is not clinically relevant, was confirmed when we used the IOP values corrected according to central corneal thickness for data analysis. The sensitivity and specificity were 0.90 and 0.95, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The ICare® tonometer proved to be comparable with other nonconventional tonometers and can be used by nonophthalmologists and paramedical personnel during screening tests of populations. In addition, the ICare® tonometer could be considered a valid alternative to GAT when GAT is not available.

Performance of the PT100 noncontact tonometer in healthy eyes

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to assess the repeatability and reproducibility of the PT100 noncontact tonometer and to compare its consistency with the Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT) in measuring intraocular pressure (IOP).

METHODS

Triplicate IOP measurements were obtained on two separate occasions using the PT100 and GAT from randomly selected eyes in 66 healthy volunteers aged 22 ± 1 years. The repeatability and reproducibility of each techniques was assessed. Agreement between the techniques was statistically quantified using intrasession repeatability for each technique as the basis for comparison.

RESULTS

Both techniques returned equal IOP values in the first measurement session (15 ± 3 mmHg). The second session showed a mean difference in average IOP (1 ± 0.71). The 95% limits of agreement between the techniques were -5.2 to 5.5 mmHg and -4.0 to 4.7 mmHg (sessions 1 and 2, respectively). These mean differences were not statistically significant (P > 0.05, paired t-test), with the PT100 underestimating IOP measurement by 1.00 mmHg. The mean intrasession IOP for GAT sessions 1 and 2 was 0 ± 0.90 mmHg and 0.04 ± 1.06 mmHg, respectively, and the corresponding mean IOP measurement difference for the PT100 was -0.06 ± 0.96 and -0.39 ± 0.94 mmHg (sessions 1 and 2, respectively; P > 0.05, paired t-test). Repeatability coefficients for the GAT IOP measurements were 1.8 mmHg and 2.1 mmHg for sessions 1 and 2, while the PT100 repeatability coefficient was 1.9 mmHg and 1.8 mmHg for sessions 1 and 2, respectively. The intrasession repeatability coefficient of both techniques for test-retest differences were within ±5 mmHg.

CONCLUSION

The PT100 noncontact tonometer produced greater repeatability than the GAT in assessment of IOP, whereas GAT resulted in more reproducible results. Both techniques showed a close level of agreement on comparison, with the PT100 underestimating IOP measurement by 1.0 mmHg only, although this was not clinically or statistically significant. Of importance is that the IOP measurements using these techniques could be interchangeable in the IOP range studied here.

Clinical evaluation of the IOPen® in a glaucomatous population

The aim of this study was to evaluate the level of agreement of measurements of intraocular pressure (IOP) taken by a rebound tonometer (IOPen®), in comparison to a reference Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT) in a glaucomatous population. Both eyes from 60 patients were assessed with the two tonometers, the induction tonometry was performed first by an experienced optometrist, and the GAT by an ophthalmologist. In this study, statistically significant differences were found when comparing the IOPen® tonometer with the GAT tonometer (p < 0.001), mean differences were -4.81 ± 4.31 and -4.76 ± 5.76 mmHg (mean ± S.D.) for the right eye and left eye respectively These values represent an underestimation in the present population by the IOPen® when compared with the GAT. Frequency distribution of differences demonstrated that in more than 71.6% of the measurements the IOP readings differed by more than 3 mmHg between the two tonometers. These results suggest that IOPen® should be used with great caution in the determination of IOP.

A history of intraocular pressure and its measurement

Doctors have not always associated elevated intraocular pressure with the vision loss from glaucoma. Although several individuals appear to have noted firmness of the eye in this condition as far back as the 10th century, elevated intraocular pressure was not routinely assessed until the latter part of the 19th century. von Graefe developed the first instrument for measuring intraocular pressure in 1865. The first reasonably accurate instrument was the Maklakoff applanation tonometer of the late 19th century; it was in widespread use throughout Eastern Europe until relatively recently. Schiötz developed an indentation tonometer that was widely used throughout the world during the first two thirds of the 20th century. Goldmann's applanation tonometer of 1950 began the era of truly accurate intraocular pressure measurement. It is still the most widely used tonometer in the world. Other devices such as the McKay-Marg tonometer (or its offspring the Tono-Pen), the pneumatonometer, and airpuff applanation tonometers are gaining adherents. The dynamic contour tonometer is the first totally new concept in tonometry in over 100 years. It is probably the most accurate of all the tonometers and is relatively independent of corneal biomechanical properties unlike its predecessors. Transpalpebral tonometers are attractive as they do not require topical anesthesia; however, they add the biomechanical properties of the eyelid to the list of potential errors and have not proven very accurate. The future should, hopefully, bring tonometers that can give diurnal or even longer indications of intraocular pressure variation. Although intraocular pressure elevation (or its absence) no longer can be counted on for diagnostic purposes, the role of intraocular pressure in the management of glaucomatous optic neuropathy remains critical.

Icare rebound tonometry in children with known and suspected glaucoma

BACKGROUND

Accurate intraocular pressure (IOP) measurement, important in managing pediatric glaucoma, often presents challenges. The Icare rebound tonometer shows promise for screening healthy children and has been reported comparable with Goldmann applanation in adults with glaucoma. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the Icare tonometer against Goldmann applanation for clinic IOP measurement in pediatric glaucoma.

METHODS

This was a prospective study comparing Icare versus Goldmann tonometry in pediatric glaucoma. Children with known or suspected glaucoma were recruited from scheduled clinic visits. IOP was measured with the Icare tonometer by a clinician and subsequently measured with Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) by a different single masked clinician.

RESULTS

A total of 71 eyes of 71 children with known or suspected glaucoma were included. IOP by GAT ranged from 9 to 36 mm Hg. Icare readings ranged from 11 to 44 mm Hg. Mean difference between Icare and GAT was 2.3 ± SD 3.7 mm Hg, p < 0.0001. Icare IOPs were within ± 3 mm Hg of GAT in 63%. Icare IOPs were ≥GAT IOPs in 75%. The following factors were not associated with Icare IOPs greater than GAT: child's age, glaucoma diagnosis, strabismus, nystagmus, central corneal thickness, Icare instrument-reported reliability, number of glaucoma surgeries or medications, corneal abnormalities, and visual acuity.

CONCLUSIONS

IOP by Icare tonometry was within 3 mm Hg of IOP by GAT in 63% and greater than GAT in 75%. This device may be reasonable to estimate IOP in selected children with known or suspected glaucoma whose IOP cannot otherwise be obtained in clinic; however, correlation of Icare IOPs with clinical findings must continue to be considered in each case.