Agreement of rebound and applanation tonometry intraocular pressure measurements during atmospheric pressure change

This study investigated the agreement of intraocular pressure measurements using rebound tonometry and applanation tonometry in response to atmospheric changes in a hyperbaric chamber. Twelve eyes of 12 healthy subjects were included in this prospective, comparative, single-masked study. Intraocular pressure measurements were performed by rebound tonometry followed by applanation tonometry in a multiplace hyperbaric chamber at 1 Bar, followed by 2, 3 and 4 Bar during compression and again at 3 and 2 Bar during decompression. Mean differences between rebound and applanation intraocular pressure measurements were 1.6, 1.7, and 2.1 mmHg at 2, 3, and 4 Bar respectively during compression and 2.6 and 2.2 mmHg at 3 and 2 Bar during decompression. Lower limits of agreement ranged from -3.7 to -5.9 mmHg and upper limits ranged from -0.3 to 1.9 mmHg. Multivariate analysis showed that the differences between rebound and applanation intraocular pressure measurements were independent of atmospheric pressure changes (p = 0.79). Intraocular pressure measured by rebound tonometry shows a systematic difference compared to intraocular measured by applanation tonometry, but this difference is not influenced by changes of atmospheric pressure up to 4 Bar in a hyperbaric chamber. Agreement in magnitude of change between devices suggests rebound tonometry is viable for assessing intraocular pressure during atmospheric changes. Future studies should be designed in consideration of expected differences in IOP values provided by the two devices.

Download Full-text

Comparison of intraocular pressure measurements with the portable PT100 noncontact tonometer and Goldmann applanation tonometry

Clinical Ophthalmology ◽

10.2147/opth.s5537 ◽

2009 ◽

pp. 341

Author(s):

Netland

Keyword(s):

Intraocular Pressure ◽

Applanation Tonometry ◽

Goldmann Applanation Tonometry ◽

Pressure Measurements ◽

Noncontact Tonometer

Download Full-text

Intraocular pressure measurements in diabetes mellitus

European Journal of Ophthalmology ◽

10.1177/1120672119890517 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 30 (6) ◽

pp. 1432-1439 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Lisa Ramm ◽

Robert Herber ◽

Eberhard Spoerl ◽

Lutz E Pillunat ◽

Naim Terai

Keyword(s):

Diabetes Mellitus ◽

Intraocular Pressure ◽

Healthy Subjects ◽

Central Corneal Thickness ◽

Corneal Thickness ◽

Applanation Tonometry ◽

Goldmann Applanation Tonometry ◽

Ocular Response Analyzer ◽

Pressure Measurements ◽

Corvis St

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.

Download Full-text

Effect of Repeated Applanation Tonometry on the Accuracy of Intraocular Pressure Measurements

Current Eye Research ◽

10.3109/02713681003678824 ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 35 (6) ◽

pp. 475-479 ◽

Cited By ~ 26

Author(s):

Dan D. Gaton ◽

Miriam Ehrenberg ◽

Moshe Lusky ◽

Orly Wussuki-Lior ◽

Gad Dotan ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Intraocular Pressure ◽

Applanation Tonometry ◽

Pressure Measurements

Download Full-text

The Effect of Corneal Thickness, Densitometry and Curvature on Intraocular Pressure Measurements Obtained by Applanation, Rebound and Dynamic Contour Tonometry

Vision ◽

10.3390/vision4040045 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 4 (4) ◽

pp. 45

Author(s):

Marco Antonio de Castro Olyntho Junior ◽

Lucas Bertazzi Augusto ◽

Carolina P. B. Gracitelli ◽

Andrew J. Tatham

Keyword(s):

Intraocular Pressure ◽

Prospective Study ◽

Corneal Thickness ◽

Applanation Tonometry ◽

Corneal Astigmatism ◽

Dynamic Contour Tonometry ◽

Pressure Measurements ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Corneal Densitometry ◽

The Relationship

Evaluate the effect of corneal thickness, densitometry and curvature on intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements obtained by Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT), non-contact tonometry (NCT), rebound tonometry (RT), and dynamic contour tonometry (DCT). A cross-sectional prospective study involving 40 participants was performed. Corneal measurements were obtained using Pentacam (Oculus GMbH, Wetzlar, Germany), densitometry was measured at annuli of 0–2, 2–6, 6–10 and 10–12 mm. The relationship between corneal thickness (central, 4 and 6 mm), corneal astigmatism and corneal densitometry and IOP was examined. There was a significant relationship between corneal thickness (central, 4 and 6 mm) and GAT180, GAT90, RT, and NCT (P < 0.001 for all comparisons) but not for DCT. Higher corneal densitometry (6–10 mm and 10–12 mm zones) was associated with higher IOP from GAT180 and GAT90, and higher densitometry in the 6–10 mm zone correlated with higher IOP from NCT, however corneal densitometry increased with age. Accounting for age, the relationship between corneal densitometry and IOP measurements was not significant. In eyes with greater corneal astigmatism there was a greater difference between GAT90 and GAT180 measurements. IOP measurements may be affected by corneal thickness, densitometry and curvature. DCT was less affected by properties of the cornea compared to other devices.

Download Full-text

Comparison of Intraocular Pressure Measurements Obtained by Rebound, Noncontact, and Goldmann Applanation Tonometry in Children

American Journal of Ophthalmology ◽

10.1016/j.ajo.2015.12.012 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 163 ◽

pp. 192 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Amra Nadarević Vodenčarević ◽

Vahid Jusufović ◽

Svjetlana Terzić ◽

Meliha Halilbašić

Keyword(s):

Intraocular Pressure ◽

Applanation Tonometry ◽

Goldmann Applanation Tonometry ◽

Pressure Measurements

Download Full-text

Effect of manual eyelid manipulation on intraocular pressure measurement by rebound tonometry

British Journal of Ophthalmology ◽

10.1136/bjophthalmol-2017-311587 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 102 (11) ◽

pp. 1515-1519 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Sung Uk Baek ◽

Ahnul Ha ◽

Young Kook Kim ◽

Jin Wook Jeoung ◽

Ki Ho Park

Keyword(s):

Intraocular Pressure ◽

Primary Open Angle Glaucoma ◽

Open Angle Glaucoma ◽

Mean Value ◽

Applanation Tonometry ◽

Palpebral Fissure ◽

Altman Plot ◽

Bland Altman Plot ◽

Rebound Tonometry ◽

The Mean

Background/aimsTo investigate the effect of eyelid manipulation on the measurement of intraocular pressure (IOP) using two different tonometries (rebound tonometry (RT) vs Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT)).Methods103 patients with primary open-angle glaucoma were prospectively enrolled. For all of the patients, IOP measurements were performed in three different ways: (1) RT with lid manipulation (LM), (2) RT without LM and (3) GAT. The order of the three measurements was randomly selected. Additionally, the palpebral fissure height (PFH; elliptical space between upper and lower eyelids) was measured.ResultsThe mean value of IOP measured by GAT was 13.97±2.80 mm Hg, which was not significantly different from that by RT without LM (13.75±2.44 mm Hg; P=0.096), but which was significantly lower than that by RT with LM (15.21±2.91 mm Hg; P<0.001). On a Bland-Altman plot, RT with LM was overestimated relative to GAT (mean: −1.5) and RT without LM (mean: −1.2). Among the high IOPs (>20 mm Hg), interestingly, those measured by RT without LM were significantly lower than those measured by GAT (P<0.001). In the subgroup analysis of PFH, the smaller the PFH, the more exaggerated the IOP difference between GAT (P=0.014) and RT with LM (P<0.001).ConclusionRT-measured IOP was significantly exaggerated when manipulation was applied to the eyelid. This overall trend was more pronounced when PFH was small. GAT-measured IOP, meanwhile, showed a good correlation with IOP measured using RT without LM.

Download Full-text

Comparison of Intraocular Pressure before and after Laser in Situ Keratomileusis Measured with Applanation Tonometry, Non Contact Tonometry and Rebound Tonometry

QJM ◽

10.1093/qjmed/hcab109.011 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 114 (Supplement_1) ◽

Author(s):

Fatma Gebreel Ahmed Gaber ◽

Tamer Mohamed El- Raggal ◽

Mohamed Gamil Metwally ◽

Ahmed Abdelmonsef Ebeid

Keyword(s):

Intraocular Pressure ◽

Central Corneal Thickness ◽

Open Angle Glaucoma ◽

Corneal Thickness ◽

Applanation Tonometry ◽

Goldmann Applanation Tonometry ◽

Rebound Tonometry ◽

Different Types ◽

Before And After

Abstract Background Measurement of intraocular pressure (IOP) plays a central role throughout ophthalmology. It is part of routine ophthalmologic examinations and important in the management and follow-up of patients with glaucoma. While elevated IOP remains the most important risk factor for development and progression of open angle glaucoma, at least half of the population diagnosed with open angle glaucoma is asymptomatic. Objectives The aim of our study is to compare the accuracy of intraocular pressure measurement before and after Laser in situ keratomeulsis (LASIK) surgery using three different types of Tonometers: Goldmann Applanation tonometry (GAT), Non contact tonometry (NCT) and Rebound tonometry (I care), considering the change in the central corneal thickness (CCT). Patients and Methods In this study Eighty eyes of 40 patients with mean age of 27.00±6.00 years were scheduled for LASIK..Central corneal thickness before and after surgery was obtained by Ultrasound (US) pachymetry.IOP values were measured before and after surgery using three different types of Tonometers: Goldmann Applanation tonometry, Non contact tonometry and Rebound tonometry. Results The results revealed that lower post-operative IOP measurements using all techniques. The least affected technique was Non –contact with IOP change 16%, followed by GAT with IOP change 18%, and finally Rebound with IOP change 19 %, respectively. The percentage of change in CCT between pre- and post- LASIK surgery measured with the Ultrasound pachymetry was statistically highly significant. There was a clinical significant correlation between Percentage of tissue ablation (PTA) and IOP change for GAT, NCT and rebound tonometry. Also, there was a significant correlation between Residual stromal bed (RSB) and IOP change for GAT and NCT. There was no clinical significant correlation between Ablation depth (AD) and percentage of change of IOP measurements pre and post LASIK, except for IOP measured with GAT when AD < 40.00 µm. Conclusion Refractive surgery causes significant lowering of IOP as measured using Goldmann applanation tonometry, non contact tonometry and rebound tonometry. The least affected tonometry post LASIK is non contact tonometry. The reduction was correlated to the percentage of tissue ablated. The ideal method to measure IOP in post-LASIK patients would be a device that is free of corneal factors.

Download Full-text