Usefulness of the Icare ic200 Rebound Tonometer in Korean

Objective: The objective of the study was to compare the posture-induced intraocular pressure (IOP) changes in primary angle-closure glaucoma (PACG) with or without glaucoma medications, and healthy control eyes with normal IOPs in Indian subjects. Materials and Methods: The IOP was measured in the sitting position and the supine position after 10, 20, and 30 min with a rebound tonometer. Results: Twenty-five patients with PACG and 30 controls with normal IOPs were studied. The IOP in the sitting position measured with the rebound tonometer was 13.8 + 3.2 mm Hg in eyes with PAC, and 12.9 + 2.9 mm Hg in eyes with normal IOPs. The IOP increased to 14.4 mm Hg, 16.8 mm Hg, and 18.9 mm Hg at 10 min, 20 min, and 30 min in PACG subjects. In normal age-matched controls, the IOP increased to 13.4 mm Hg, 14.9 mm Hg, and 17.8 mm Hg at 10 min, 20 min, and 30 min, respectively, but none of these differences were significant (P = 0.09; P = 0.08, P = 0.08). The mean postural IOP change from baseline was also not significant between the two groups. Only three patients were on single antiglaucoma medication with well-controlled IOP in the PACG group. Conclusions: Postural IOP changes are comparable among eyes with PACG with and without glaucoma medications, and control eyes.

Download Full-text

Comparison of IOP Measurement by Goldmann Applanation Tonometer, ICare Rebound Tonometer, and Tono-Pen in Keratoconus Patients after MyoRing Implantation

Journal of Ophthalmology ◽

10.1155/2019/1964107 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 2019 ◽

pp. 1-7

Author(s):

Mahmoud Rateb ◽

Mahmoud Abdel-Radi ◽

Zeiad Eldaly ◽

Mohamed Nagy Elmohamady ◽

Asaad Noor El Din

Keyword(s):

Central Corneal Thickness ◽

Pearson Correlation ◽

Corneal Thickness ◽

Altman Analysis ◽

Bland Altman Analysis ◽

Rebound Tonometer ◽

Goldmann Applanation Tonometer ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Applanation Tonometer ◽

Icare Rebound Tonometer

Purpose. To evaluate the different IOP readings by Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT), ICare rebound tonometer, and Tono-Pen in keratoconus patients after MyoRing implantation. To assess the influence of central corneal thickness (CCT) and thinnest corneal location (TCL) on IOP measurements by different tonometers. Setting. Prospective observational study was conducted in two private centers in Egypt from February 2015 to November 2016. Methods. Seventeen eyes of 10 patients suffering from keratoconus and who underwent MyoRing implantation were recruited. All subjects underwent GAT, ICare, and Tono-Pen IOP measurements in random order. Central corneal thickness and thinnest corneal location were assessed by Pentacam. Difference in mean in IOP readings was assessed by T-test. Correlation between each pair of devices was evaluated by Pearson correlation coefficient. The Bland–Altman analysis was used to assess intertonometer agreement. Results. Seventeen eyes (10 patients) were evaluated. The mean IOP reading was 13.9 ± 3.68, 12.41 ± 2.87, and 14.29 ± 1.31 mmHg in GAT, ICare, and Tono-Pen group, respectively. There was a significant difference between IOP readings by GAT/ICare and Tono-Pen/ICare (p value: 0.032 and 0.002, respectively) with no significant difference between GAT/Tono-Pen (p value: 0.554). Mean difference in IOP measurements between GAT/ICare was 1.49 ± 2.61 mmHg, Tono-Pen/ICare was 1.89 ± 2.15 mmHg, and GAT/Tono-Pen was −0.39 ± 2.59 mmHg. There was no significant correlation between the difference in IOP readings among any pair of devices and CCC or TCL. The Bland–Altman analysis showed a reasonable agreement between any pair of tonometers.

Download Full-text

Comparison of intraocular pressure in healthy brachycephalic and nonbrachycephalic cats using the Icare® TONOVET Plus rebound tonometer

Veterinary Ophthalmology ◽

10.1111/vop.12929 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Kamolchanok Kerdchuchuen ◽

Kingkarn Samathayanon ◽

Pitchapa Phientong ◽

Suprapha Chattraphirat ◽

Orapun Jaturakan ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Intraocular Pressure ◽

Rebound Tonometer

Download Full-text

Comparison of the ICareR rebound tonometer with the Goldmann tonometer in a normal population

Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics ◽

10.1111/j.1475-1313.2005.00327.x ◽

2005 ◽

Vol 25 (5) ◽

pp. 436-440 ◽

Cited By ~ 96

Author(s):

P. Fernandes ◽

J. A. Diaz-Rey ◽

A. Queiros ◽

J. M. Gonzalez-Meijome ◽

J. Jorge

Keyword(s):

Normal Population ◽

Rebound Tonometer ◽

Goldmann Tonometer

Download Full-text

Assessment of intraocular pressure in chinchillas of different age groups using rebound tonometry

Ciência Rural ◽

10.1590/0103-8478cr20151206 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 46 (8) ◽

pp. 1466-1471 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Flor Diana Yokoay Claros Chacaltana ◽

João Antonio Tadeu Pigatto ◽

Ione Terezinha Denardin

Keyword(s):

Intraocular Pressure ◽

Age Groups ◽

Time Of Day ◽

Age Group ◽

Group Iii ◽

Rebound Tonometer ◽

Indirect Ophthalmoscopy ◽

Group I ◽

Schirmer Tear Test ◽

The Mean

ABSTRACT: The aim of this research was to measure the intraocular pressure (IOP) of normal chinchilla eyes using the rebound tonometer. A further aim was to assess whether there were differences in the values of intraocular pressure in relation to animals age, gender and time of day. Thirty-six chinchillas were divided into three groups of 12 chinchillas each, by age: Group I (2-6-month-old), Group II (20 and 34 months) and Group III (37 and 135 months). Ophthalmic examination was performed previously by Schirmer tear test, slit lamp biomicroscopy, indirect ophthalmoscopy and fluorescein test in all chinchillas. Three measurements of intraocular pressure were assessed on the same day (7, 12 and 19h). Tonometry was performed on both eyes using the rebound tonometer after calibration in "p" mode. Statistical analysis was performed with SigmaPlot for Windows. The mean IOP for groups I, II and III were 2.47±0.581mmHg, 2.47±0.581mmHg and 2.51±0.531mmHg, respectively. No significant differences were reported between age and IOP and no significant differences were reported between the time of day and IOP. The IOP in chinchillas did not differ significantly between genders or ages of the animals, and did not change with time of day.

Download Full-text

Reliability Comparison of Rebound Tonometer at the Upright and Supine Position

Journal of the Korean Ophthalmological Society ◽

10.3341/jkos.2015.56.1.93 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 56 (1) ◽

pp. 93

Author(s):

Kyoung Lae Kim ◽

Ka Young Lee ◽

Young Cheol Yoo

Keyword(s):

Supine Position ◽

Rebound Tonometer

Download Full-text

Comparison of the Icare ic100 rebound tonometer and the Goldmann applanation tonometer in 1000 eyes

Ophthalmic Research ◽

10.1159/000511455 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Arjun Gopal Subramaniam ◽

Penelope Allen ◽

Tze'Yo Toh

Keyword(s):

Rebound Tonometer ◽

Goldmann Applanation Tonometer ◽

Applanation Tonometer

Download Full-text

Analysis of reproducibility, evaluation, and preference of the new iC100 rebound tonometer versus iCare PRO and Perkins portable applanation tonometry

European Journal of Ophthalmology ◽

10.1177/1120672119878017 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 30 (6) ◽

pp. 1349-1355 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Mercedes Molero-Senosiaín ◽

Laura Morales-Fernández ◽

Federico Saenz-Francés ◽

Julian García-Feijoo ◽

Jose María Martínez-de-la-Casa

Keyword(s):

Intraocular Pressure ◽

Visual Analogue Scale ◽

Analogue Scale ◽

Normal Subjects ◽

Applanation Tonometry ◽

Rebound Tonometer ◽

The Mean ◽

The Difference ◽

The Comparative Study ◽

Mean Time

Objectives: To analyze the reproducibility of the new iC100 rebound tonometer, to compare its results with the applanation tonometry and iCare PRO and to evaluate the preference between them. Materials and methods: For the study of reproducibility, 15 eyes of 15 healthy Caucasian subjects were included. Three measurements were taken each day in three separate sessions. For the comparative study, 150 eyes of 150 Caucasian subjects were included (75 normal subjects and 75 patients with glaucoma). Three consecutive measurements were collected with each tonometer, randomizing the order of use. The discomfort caused by each tonometer was evaluated using the visual analogue scale. Results: No statistically significant differences were detected between sessions. In the comparison between tonometers, the measurements with iC100 were statistically lower than those of Perkins (−1.35 ± 0.417, p = 0.004) and that iCare PRO (−1.41 ± 0.417, p = 0.002). The difference between PRO and Perkins was not statistically significant ( p = 0.990). The mean time of measurement (in seconds) with iC100 was significantly lower than with Perkins (6.74 ± 1.46 vs 15.53 ± 2.01, p < 0.001) and that PRO (6.74 ± 1.46 vs 11.53 ± 1.85, p < 0.001). Visual analogue scale score with iC100 was lower than Perkins (1.33 ± 0.99 vs 1.73 ± 1.10, p < 0.05). In total, 61.7% preferred iC100 against Perkins. Conclusion: The reproducibility of this instrument has been proven good. iC100 underestimates intraocular pressure compared to applanation tonometry at normal values and tends to overestimate it in high intraocular pressure values. Most of the subjects preferred iC100 tonometer.

Download Full-text