Intraocular pressure measurement using ICare rebound tonometer in different positions of eye and different locations on cornea

被引:0
|
作者
Wongwanwatana, Sirada [1 ]
Treesit, Isaraporn [1 ]
Funarunart, Panrapee [1 ]
Iemsomboon, Wallop [1 ]
Choontanom, Raveewan [1 ]
机构
[1] Phramongkutklao Hosp, Dept Ophthalmol, Phramongkutklao Coll Med, 315 Ratchawithi Rd, Bangkok 10400, Thailand
关键词
IC200; iCare rebound tonometer; intraocular pressure; GOLDMANN APPLANATION TONOMETER; AGREEMENT;
D O I
10.1097/MD.0000000000034874
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Intraocular pressure (IOP) is one of the most crucial aspects for diagnosis and treatment plan among patients with glaucoma. Although the gold standard for IOP measurement is Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT)([1]), it must be mounted to a slit lamp biomicroscope. However, rebound tonometer has become popular due to its ease of operation and portable design, does not require topical anesthesia, and results do not differ significantly from those of GAT([2]). The purpose of this cross-sectional study is to investigate the difference in IOP measurement with iCare IC200 in different angles of the eye and different corneal locations. All participants underwent IOP measurement by GAT twice. Then, IOP was measured with iCare by a single physician. IOP was measured in a straight manner in the upright patient position; then participants were asked to look at fixation targets, which located in four different points. IOP was measured in upgaze, downgaze, medial gaze, and lateral gaze. Then, IOP was measured at 2mm from limbus in superior, inferior, nasal, and temporal cornea. All methods were measured twice, and the mean was used for calculation. The physician who measured IOP by iCare was masked from GAT results. A total of 168 eyes were tested with a mean age of 62.15 +/- 12.34 years. Mean IOP measured by GAT and iCare at the central cornea was 15.53 +/- 5.57 and 14.78 +/- 6.14 mmHg, respectively. The standardized mean difference (SMD) between iCare and GAT was 0.13 (-0.09-0.34), which is insignificant. The average IOP was 0.6, 0.47, 0.91, and 0.44 mmHg lower than the primary position in upgaze, downgaze, medial gaze, and lateral gaze 15degrees angulated positions respectively (p<.01). IOPs at 2mm from limbus in the inferior, nasal, and temporal cornea were 0.5, 0.69, and 0.57 mmHg lower than IOP measured at the central cornea (p=<.01). IOP measurements with iCare in different angles of eye were statistically significantly lower than in the primary position. Similarly, IOPs at different locations on cornea were lower than at the central cornea. However, the difference in IOP measurements with iCare in different angles of the eye and different corneal locations was in the trivial range and might be clinically insignificant.
引用
收藏
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Intraocular Pressure According to Eye Gaze by iCare Rebound Tonometry in Normal Participants and Glaucoma Patients
    Kim, Yu Jeong
    Moon, Yeji
    Kwon, Amy M.
    Lim, Han Woong
    Lee, Won June
    JOURNAL OF GLAUCOMA, 2021, 30 (08) : 643 - 647
  • [32] Reliability and reproducibility of introcular pressure (IOP) measurement with the Icare® Home rebound tonometer (model TA022) and comparison with Goldmann applanation tonometer in glaucoma patients
    Valero, B.
    Fenolland, J. -R.
    Rosenberg, R.
    Sendon, D.
    Mesnard, C.
    Sigaux, M.
    Giraud, J. -M.
    Renard, J. -P.
    JOURNAL FRANCAIS D OPHTALMOLOGIE, 2017, 40 (10): : 865 - 875
  • [33] Intraocular pressure measurement over soft contact lens by rebound tonometer: a comparative study
    Senay Asik Nacaroglu
    Emine Seker Un
    Mehmet Giray Ersoz
    Yelda Tasci
    International Journal of Ophthalmology, 2015, (03) : 540 - 543
  • [34] Variations of Intraocular Pressure Measured by Goldmann Applanation Tonometer, Tono-Pen, iCare Rebound Tonometer, and Pascal Dynamic Contour Tonometer in Patients With Corneal Edema After Phacoemulsification
    Kiddee, Weerawat
    Tanjana, Arunee
    JOURNAL OF GLAUCOMA, 2021, 30 (04) : 317 - 324
  • [35] Measurement of intraocular pressure (IOP) in chickens using a rebound tonometer: Quantitative evaluation of variance due to position inaccuracies
    Prashar, A.
    Guggenheim, J. A.
    Erichsen, J. T.
    Hocking, Pm.
    Morgan, J. E.
    EXPERIMENTAL EYE RESEARCH, 2007, 85 (04) : 563 - 571
  • [36] Non-invasive determination of intraocular pressure in the rat eye. Comparison of an electronic tonometer (TonoPen), and a rebound (impact probe) tonometer
    David Goldblum
    Antti Kontiola
    Thom Mittag
    Bin Chen
    John Danias
    Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, 2002, 240 : 942 - 946
  • [37] Assessment of intraocular pressure in chinchillas of different age groups using rebound tonometry
    Yokoay Claros Chacaltana, Flor Diana
    Tadeu Pigatto, Joao Antonio
    Denardin, Ione Terezinha
    CIENCIA RURAL, 2016, 46 (08): : 1466 - 1471
  • [38] Comparative study of recording intraocular pressure in adults by three different tonometers Goldmann applanation tonometer, noncontact tonometer, and tonopen
    Manade, Varsha V.
    Kotecha, Megha R.
    Chodvadiya, Surbhi A.
    Ta, Jhimli
    Paranjpe, Radhika R.
    JOURNAL OF THE EGYPTIAN OPHTHALMOLOGICAL SOCIETY, 2024, 117 (01) : 39 - 42
  • [39] Red-free light for measurement of intraocular pressure using Goldmann applanation tonometer without fluorescein
    Ghoneim, Ehab M.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2014, 24 (01) : 84 - 87
  • [40] Measurement of intraocular pressure in clinically normal Turkish Shepherd Dogs with the rebound tonometer (TonoVet®) and the applanation tonometer (Tono-Pen Vet®)
    Kulualp, Kadri
    Yurdakul, Ibrahim
    Erol, Hanifi
    Atalan, Gultekin
    Kilic, Servet
    MEDYCYNA WETERYNARYJNA-VETERINARY MEDICINE-SCIENCE AND PRACTICE, 2018, 74 (09): : 568 - 573