scholarly journals Smart specialisation concept in metrology for blood and intraocular pressure measurements

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 ◽  
pp. 100283
Author(s):  
Václav Sedlák ◽  
Dominik Pražák ◽  
Markus Schiebl ◽  
Michał Nawotka ◽  
Ehlimana Jugo ◽  
...  
2006 ◽  
Vol 42 (3) ◽  
pp. 207-211 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy M. Pauli ◽  
Ellison Bentley ◽  
Kathryn A. Diehl ◽  
Paul E. Miller

The effect on intraocular pressure (IOP) from dogs pulling against a collar or a harness was evaluated in 51 eyes of 26 dogs. The force each dog generated while pulling against a collar or a harness was measured. Intraocular pressure measurements were obtained during application of corresponding pressures via collars or harnesses. Intraocular pressure increased significantly from baseline when pressure was applied via a collar but not via a harness. Based on the results of the study, dogs with weak or thin corneas, glaucoma, or conditions for which an increase in IOP could be harmful should wear a harness instead of a collar, especially during exercise or activity.


2021 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Argyrios Tzamalis ◽  
Chara Tsiampali ◽  
Efthymia Prousali ◽  
Asimina Mataftsi ◽  
Nikolaos Ziakas ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 63 (6) ◽  
pp. 541-549
Author(s):  
Tomoya Nishida ◽  
Takashi Kojima ◽  
Takahiro Kataoka ◽  
Naoki Isogai ◽  
Yoko Yoshida ◽  
...  

<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> Although biomechanically corrected intraocular pressure (bIOP) is available, the effectiveness of intraocular pressure (IOP) correction in keratoconus and forme fruste keratoconus (FFK) eyes has not been investigated. <b><i>Objective:</i></b> Evaluation of bIOP measurements in eyes with keratoconus and FFK. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> Forty-two eyes in 21 patients with keratoconus in one eye and FFK in the fellow eye were examined (KC/FFK group; mean age 24.62 ± 8.6 years; 16 males and 5 females). The control group consisted of 62 eyes in 31 unaffected subjects (mean age 26.26 ± 3.64 years; 15 males and 16 females). The bIOP was determined using a Scheimpflug-based tonometer (Corvis Scheimpflug Technology [Corvis ST®]) after measuring the IOP with a conventional non-contact tonometer (NIOP). The agreement between NIOP and bIOP values was examined using the Bland-Altman plot. The difference between NIOP and bIOP (bIOP correction amount) was compared between keratoconus and FFK eyes. <b><i>Results:</i></b> In the control group, there were no significant differences between right and left eyes in both NIOP and bIOP values (<i>p</i> = 0.975 and <i>p</i> = 0.224, respectively). In the KC/FFK group, NIOP values were significantly lower in the keratoconus eyes (9.93 ± 1.96 mm Hg) than in the FFK eyes (12.23 ± 3.03 mm Hg; <i>p</i> = 0.0003). There was no significant difference in bIOP values between the right and left eyes of the KC/FFK group (<i>p</i> = 0.168). The bIOP correction amount was significantly increased in keratoconus eyes (3.58 ± 2.12 mm Hg) compared to in FFK eyes (1.80 ± 3.32 mm Hg; <i>p</i> = 0.011). <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> For eyes with keratoconus and FFK, the bIOP method is effective to adjust IOP measurements based on corneal biomechanical properties.


2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (6) ◽  
pp. 1432-1439 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa Ramm ◽  
Robert Herber ◽  
Eberhard Spoerl ◽  
Lutz E Pillunat ◽  
Naim Terai

Purpose: To investigate the impact of diabetes mellitus–induced changes on intraocular pressure measurements using Goldmann applanation tonometry, Ocular Response Analyzer, and Corvis ST. Methods: Measurements were done using Goldmann applanation tonometry, Ocular Response Analyzer, and Corvis ST in 69 diabetic patients. Biomechanical-corrected intraocular pressure values by Ocular Response Analyzer (IOPcc) and Corvis ST (bIOP) were used. In addition, biometry and tomography were performed and information on diabetes mellitus specific factors was collected. Results were compared to an age-matched group of 68 healthy subjects. Results: In diabetes mellitus, Goldmann applanation tonometry intraocular pressure (P = 0.193) and central corneal thickness (P = 0.184) were slightly increased. Also, IOPcc (P = 0.075) and bIOP (P = 0.542) showed no significant group difference. In both groups, IOPcc was higher than Goldmann applanation tonometry intraocular pressure (P = 0.002, P < 0.001), while bIOP was nearly equal to Goldmann applanation tonometry intraocular pressure (P = 0.795, P = 0.323). Central corneal thickness showed a tendency to higher values in poorly controlled than in controlled diabetes mellitus (P = 0.059). Goldmann applanation tonometry intraocular pressure correlated to central corneal thickness, while IOPcc and bIOP were independent from central corneal thickness in both groups. All intraocular pressure values showed significant associations to corneal biomechanical parameters. Only in diabetes mellitus, bIOP was correlated to Pachy slope (P = 0.023). Conclusion: In diabetes mellitus, Goldmann applanation tonometry intraocular pressure was slightly, but not significantly, increased, which might be caused by a higher central corneal thickness and changes in corneal biomechanical properties. However, intraocular pressure values measured by Ocular Response Analyzer and Corvis ST were not significantly different between diabetes mellitus patients and healthy subjects. The bIOP showed a higher agreement with Goldmann applanation tonometry than IOPcc and was independent from central corneal thickness.


2010 ◽  
Vol 35 (6) ◽  
pp. 475-479 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dan D. Gaton ◽  
Miriam Ehrenberg ◽  
Moshe Lusky ◽  
Orly Wussuki-Lior ◽  
Gad Dotan ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document