Comparative study of recording intraocular pressure in adults by three different tonometers Goldmann applanation tonometer, noncontact tonometer, and tonopen

IF 0.1 Q4 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Varsha V. Manade, Megha R. Kotecha, Surbhi A. Chodvadiya, Jhimli Ta, Radhika R. Paranjpe
{"title":"Comparative study of recording intraocular pressure in adults by three different tonometers Goldmann applanation tonometer, noncontact tonometer, and tonopen","authors":"Varsha V. Manade, Megha R. Kotecha, Surbhi A. Chodvadiya, Jhimli Ta, Radhika R. Paranjpe","doi":"10.4103/ejos.ejos_50_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n To compare and correlate the intraocular pressure (IOP) measurement obtained by Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT), noncontact tonometer (NCT), and tonopen in normal and glaucomatous patients.\n \n \n \n A cross-sectional, observational, and comparative study was carried out. Two hundred eyes of 100 patients were screened, detailed history was taken, and thorough ocular examination was done. IOP was recorded using NCT (Keeler Pulsair), Tonopen (Tonopen XL), and GAT. Gonioscopy, optic disc examination, central corneal thickness, and visual field testing were done.\n \n \n \n The mean age of the study group was 53.25 years. Mean IOP by NCT was 19.20 mmHg, by GAT was 22.44 mmHg, and by tonopen was 19.33 mmHg. There was statistically significant difference between mean IOP with respect to method used (P<0.001). Forty-eight percent of eyes, 40% eyes, and 49% eyes had IOP less than 18 mmHg by NCT, GAT, and tonopen, respectively. In total, 35.5% eyes, 19.5% eyes, and 35.5% eyes had IOP ranging between 18 and 25 mmHg by NCT, GAT, and tonopen, respectively. In total, 16.5% eyes, 40.5% eyes, and 15.5% eyes had IOP more than 25 mmHg by NCT, GAT, and tonopen, respectively.\n \n \n \n NCT and tonopen readings correlate well with GAT readings in physiologic IOP range up to 20 mmHg, but at higher IOP range they tend to underestimate IOP readings as compared with GAT. However, NCT and tonopen can be used for screening purpose as they are portable and easy to use.\n","PeriodicalId":31572,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Egyptian Ophthalmological Society","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Egyptian Ophthalmological Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/ejos.ejos_50_23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

To compare and correlate the intraocular pressure (IOP) measurement obtained by Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT), noncontact tonometer (NCT), and tonopen in normal and glaucomatous patients. A cross-sectional, observational, and comparative study was carried out. Two hundred eyes of 100 patients were screened, detailed history was taken, and thorough ocular examination was done. IOP was recorded using NCT (Keeler Pulsair), Tonopen (Tonopen XL), and GAT. Gonioscopy, optic disc examination, central corneal thickness, and visual field testing were done. The mean age of the study group was 53.25 years. Mean IOP by NCT was 19.20 mmHg, by GAT was 22.44 mmHg, and by tonopen was 19.33 mmHg. There was statistically significant difference between mean IOP with respect to method used (P<0.001). Forty-eight percent of eyes, 40% eyes, and 49% eyes had IOP less than 18 mmHg by NCT, GAT, and tonopen, respectively. In total, 35.5% eyes, 19.5% eyes, and 35.5% eyes had IOP ranging between 18 and 25 mmHg by NCT, GAT, and tonopen, respectively. In total, 16.5% eyes, 40.5% eyes, and 15.5% eyes had IOP more than 25 mmHg by NCT, GAT, and tonopen, respectively. NCT and tonopen readings correlate well with GAT readings in physiologic IOP range up to 20 mmHg, but at higher IOP range they tend to underestimate IOP readings as compared with GAT. However, NCT and tonopen can be used for screening purpose as they are portable and easy to use.
使用三种不同眼压计记录成人眼压的比较研究 戈德曼眼压计、非接触式眼压计和眼压计
对正常人和青光眼患者使用戈德曼眼压计(GAT)、非接触式眼压计(NCT)和眼压计(tonopen)测量的眼压进行比较和相关性分析。 这是一项横断面、观察性和对比性研究。研究筛选了 100 名患者的 200 只眼睛,详细询问了病史,并进行了全面的眼部检查。使用 NCT(Keeler Pulsair)、Tonopen(Tonopen XL)和 GAT 记录眼压。还进行了眼球镜检查、视盘检查、中央角膜厚度和视野测试。 研究组的平均年龄为 53.25 岁。NCT 检测的平均眼压为 19.20 mmHg,GAT 检测的平均眼压为 22.44 mmHg,tonopen 检测的平均眼压为 19.33 mmHg。不同方法得出的平均眼压差异有统计学意义(P<0.001)。通过 NCT、GAT 和 tonopen,分别有 48% 眼、40% 眼和 49% 眼的眼压低于 18 mmHg。根据 NCT、GAT 和眼压计,分别有 35.5%、19.5% 和 35.5%的眼睛的眼压在 18 至 25 mmHg 之间。通过 NCT、GAT 和 tonopen 测定,分别有 16.5%、40.5% 和 15.5%的眼睛眼压超过 25 mmHg。 在 20 mmHg 以下的生理眼压范围内,NCT 和 tonopen 读数与 GAT 读数相关性良好,但在更高的眼压范围内,与 GAT 相比,它们往往会低估眼压读数。不过,NCT 和 tonopen 可用于筛查目的,因为它们携带方便,易于使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8
审稿时长
19 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信