A Clinical Description of Ocular Response Analyzer Measurements

被引:46
作者
Lau, William [1 ]
Pye, David [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ New S Wales, Sch Optometry & Vis Sci, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia
[2] Univ New S Wales, Ctr Eye Hlth, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia
关键词
CENTRAL CORNEAL THICKNESS; GOLDMANN APPLANATION TONOMETRY; INTRAOCULAR-PRESSURE MEASUREMENTS; BIOMECHANICAL PROPERTIES; NONCONTACT TONOMETRY; DYNAMIC CONTOUR; ASSOCIATION; CURVATURE; EYE; HYSTERESIS;
D O I
10.1167/iovs.10-6763
中图分类号
R77 [眼科学];
学科分类号
100212 ;
摘要
PURPOSE. To examine the interrelationships among the Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA; Reichert Ophthalmic Instruments, Buffalo, NY), Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT), and corneal geometry measurements in a young, healthy sample. METHODS. Central corneal radius, ORA, GAT, and central corneal thickness (CCT) measurements were taken in 99 subjects (age, 21 +/- 2 years) who were free of ocular and systemic disease. RESULTS. The mean +/- SD corneal hysteresis (CH) and corneal resistance factor (CRF) were 10.4 +/- 1.2 and 10.1 +/- 1.5 mm Hg, respectively. The Bland-Altman 95% limits of agreement of ORA Goldmann-correlated IOP (ORAg) and ORA corneal-compensated (ORAcc) IOP with reference to GAT were -4.5 to +6.0 and -4.1 to +6.8 mm Hg, respectively. The full equations used by the ORA to calculate ORAcc and CRF were reconstructed. The statistically significant effect of CCT on GAT became redundant if CRF was included in a multivariate regression analysis. Both CH and CRF were associated with CCT (R-2 = 0.252 and 0.290, respectively). CONCLUSIONS. Sample CH and CRF were consistent with those reported in the literature. ORAg and ORAcc agreed poorly with GAT. CRF appears to be at least a partial description of corneal rigidity. The ocular determinants of CH are unclear. (Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011; 52:2911-2916) DOI:10.1167/iovs.10-6763
引用
收藏
页码:2911 / 2916
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
[1]   Effect of central corneal thickness and corneal hysteresis on tonometry as measured by dynamic contour tonometry, Ocular Response Analyzer, and Goldmann tonometry in glaucomatous eyes [J].
Annette, Hager ;
Kristina, Loge ;
Bernd, Schroeder ;
Mark-Oliver, Fuellhas ;
Wolfgang, Wiegand .
JOURNAL OF GLAUCOMA, 2008, 17 (05) :361-365
[2]   Ocular Response Analyzer and Goldmann Applanation Tonometry: A Comparative Study of Findings [J].
Bayoumi, Nader Hussien Lutfy ;
Bessa, Amr Saad ;
El Massry, Ahmed Abdel Karim .
JOURNAL OF GLAUCOMA, 2010, 19 (09) :627-631
[3]  
Bland JM, 1999, STAT METHODS MED RES, V8, P135, DOI 10.1177/096228029900800204
[4]   Corneal thickness and intraocular pressure in a nonglaucomatous Burmese population - The meiktila eye study [J].
Casson, Robert J. ;
Abraham, Lekha M. ;
Newland, Henry S. ;
Muecke, James ;
Sullivan, Thomas ;
Selva, Dinesh ;
Aung, Than .
ARCHIVES OF OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2008, 126 (07) :981-985
[5]   The influence of cornea properties on rebound tonometry [J].
Chui, Wan-sang ;
Lam, Andrew ;
Chen, Davie ;
Chiu, Roger .
OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2008, 115 (01) :80-84
[6]   Human corneal thickness and its impact on intraocular pressure measures: A review and meta-analysis approach [J].
Doughty, MJ ;
Zaman, ML .
SURVEY OF OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2000, 44 (05) :367-408
[7]   Diurnal variation of corneal sensitivity and thickness [J].
du Toit, R ;
Vega, JA ;
Fonn, D ;
Simpson, T .
CORNEA, 2003, 22 (03) :205-209
[8]  
EHLERS N, 1975, ACTA OPHTHALMOL, V53, P34
[9]   Evaluation of agreement between intraocular pressure measurements using Goldmann applanation tonometry and Goldmann correlated intraocular pressure by Reichert's ocular response analyser [J].
Ehrlich, J. R. ;
Haseltine, S. ;
Shimmyo, M. ;
Radcliffe, N. M. .
EYE, 2010, 24 (10) :1555-1560
[10]   Evaluation of goldmann applanation tonometry using a nonlinear finite element ocular model [J].
Elsheikh, Ahmed ;
Wang, Defu ;
Kotecha, Aachal ;
Brown, Michael ;
Garway-Heath, David .
ANNALS OF BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING, 2006, 34 (10) :1628-1640