Agreement in central corneal thickness measurement between Corvis ST and ocular response analyzer

被引:4
作者
Salouti, Ramin [1 ,2 ]
Razeghinejad, Reza [3 ]
Masihpour, Nasrin [1 ]
Ghoreyshi, Maryam [2 ,4 ]
Nowroozzadeh, M. Hossein [1 ]
机构
[1] Shiraz Univ Med Sci, Poostchi Ophthalmol Res Ctr, Poostchi Clin, Zand St, Shiraz 7134997446, Iran
[2] Salouti Eye Clin, Salouti Cornea Res Ctr, Shiraz, Iran
[3] Wills Eye Hosp & Res Inst, Glaucoma Serv, Philadelphia, PA USA
[4] Shiraz Univ Med Sci, Hlth Policy Res Ctr, Shiraz, Iran
关键词
Agreement; Central corneal thickness; Corvis ST; Ocular response analyzer; BIOMECHANICAL PROPERTIES; HYPERTENSION TREATMENT; INTRAOCULAR-PRESSURE; STATISTICAL-METHODS; NONCONTACT; TOPOGRAPHY; SYSTEM;
D O I
10.1007/s10792-020-01436-y
中图分类号
R77 [眼科学];
学科分类号
100212 ;
摘要
Purpose To evaluate the agreement and interchangeability of noncontact devices of ocular response analyzer (ORA) and the Corvis ST in central corneal thickness measurement. Methods In this prospective comparative study, central corneal thickness (CCT) readings of 284 healthy, nonglaucoma subjects, without previous ocular surgery, were measured with ORA and Corvis ST. Only data from right eyes were analyzed. The mean values of CCT measurements by the ORA versus Corvis ST were compared with the paired sample t test. Bland-Altman plots and 95% limits of agreement (95% LOA) were used to assess the agreement between the measurements of the two devices. Results The mean (+/- standard deviation) age of the participants was 28.0 +/- 4.9 years, and 36.6% were male. The mean CCT measurements were 555 +/- 32 mu m by the ORA and 536 +/- 32 mu m with the Corvis ST (P < 0.001). The Pearson correlation coefficient was 0.964 (P < 0.001). The 95% LOA between the ORA and the Corvis ST was 2.2 to 35.9 mu m. Conclusions The ORA measured the CCT up to 35.9 mu m greater than Corvis ST. Therefore, the two devices may not be used interchangeably for measuring CCT.
引用
收藏
页码:2563 / 2567
页数:5
相关论文
共 24 条
  • [1] Prevalence of Keratoconus in a Refractive Surgery Population
    Al-Amri, Abdulrahman Mohammed
    [J]. JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2018, 2018
  • [2] STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT
    BLAND, JM
    ALTMAN, DG
    [J]. LANCET, 1986, 1 (8476) : 307 - 310
  • [3] Central corneal thickness in the Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study (OHTS)
    Brandt, JD
    Beiser, JA
    Kass, MA
    Gordon, MO
    [J]. OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2001, 108 (10) : 1779 - 1788
  • [4] Chang SW., 2014, TAIWAN J OPHTHALMOLO, V4, P163, DOI [10.1016/j.tjo.2014.08.001, DOI 10.1016/J.TJO.2014.08.001]
  • [5] Human corneal thickness and its impact on intraocular pressure measures: A review and meta-analysis approach
    Doughty, MJ
    Zaman, ML
    [J]. SURVEY OF OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2000, 44 (05) : 367 - 408
  • [6] Intraocular Pressure, Central Corneal Thickness, and Prevalence of Open-Angle Glaucoma: The Los Angeles Latino Eye Study
    Francis, Brian A.
    Varma, Rohit
    Chopra, Vikas
    Lai, Mei-Ying
    Shtir, Corina
    Azen, Stanley P.
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2008, 146 (05) : 741 - 746
  • [7] Gordon MO, 2002, ARCH OPHTHALMOL-CHIC, V120, P714
  • [8] Hao Geng-Sheng, 2011, Zhonghua Yan Ke Za Zhi, V47, P142
  • [9] A New Tonometer-The Corvis ST Tonometer: Clinical Comparison with Noncontact and Goldmann Applanation Tonometers
    Hong, Jiaxu
    Xu, Jianjiang
    Wei, Anji
    Deng, Sophie X.
    Cui, Xinhan
    Yu, Xiaobo
    Sun, Xinghuai
    [J]. INVESTIGATIVE OPHTHALMOLOGY & VISUAL SCIENCE, 2013, 54 (01) : 659 - 665
  • [10] Kaushik Sushmita, 2012, J Curr Glaucoma Pract, V6, P17