![]() Iliev ME, Goldblum D, Katsoulis K, Amstutz C, Frueh B (2006) Comparison of rebound tonometry with Goldmann applanation tonometry and correlation with central corneal thickness. Heijl A, Leske MC, Bengtsson B, Hyman L, Bengtsson B, Hussein M (2002) Reduction of intraocular pressure and glaucoma progression: results from the Early Manifest Glaucoma Trial. Goldmann H, Schmidt T (1957) About applanation tonometry. ![]() Ophthalmologica 154(1):59–74įernandes P, Diaz-Rey JA, Queiros A, Gonzalez-Meijome JM, Jorge J (2005) Comparison of the ICare rebound tonometer with the Goldmann tonometer in a normal population. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 84(2):206–209ĭekking HM, Coster HD (1967) Dynamic tonometry. Pain 22(1):1–31ĭavies LN, Bartlett H, Mallen EA, Wolffsohn JS (2006) Clinical evaluation of rebound tonometer. ![]() J Glaucoma 15(3):213–217Ĭhapman CR, Casey KL, Dubner R, Foley KM, Gracely RH, Reading AE (1985) Pain measurement: an overview. Lancet 1(8476):307–310īrusini P, Salvetat ML, Zeppieri M, Tosoni C, Parisi L (2006) Comparison of ICare tonometer with Goldmann applanation tonometer in glaucoma patients. Ophthalmologica 151(5):604–614īland JM, Altman DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Internationaler Standard für Augentonometer ISO 8612 (2001) Beuth-Verlag GmbH, Berlinīechrakis E (1966) On spontaneous decrease of pressure in applanation tonometry. The Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study (AGIS) : 7 (2000) The relationship between control of intraocular pressure and visual field deterioration. In high IOP values, measurements with the iCare tonometer do not correlate well with GAT. The iCare tonometer is a mobile alternative to GAT in a low to moderate IOP range, but our findings show a greater deviation than previously reported. The measurement with the iCare tonometer was well tolerated 100% of the patients denied any discomfort. In the higher IOP range (23–60 mmHg), however, the deviation was almost twice as large. The distribution of the differences in IOP was similar, from 7–22 mmHg. Overall, the 95% confidence interval of the differences between the two devices was −8.67 to 10.25 mmHg and in 62.7%, the iCare measurement was within ☓ mmHg of the GAT measurements. To establish the agreement between the two devices, a Bland-Altman analysis was performed. All patients were asked about discomfort during the iCare measurement. The measurements were taken by two independent observers in a masked fashion. The study included 75 eyes of 75 patients. Furthermore, the comfort level of the iCare measurement was evaluated. The aim of this study was to compare the intraocular pressure (IOP) results measured by the iCare rebound tonometer with those obtained by the Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT) over a wide range of IOP values.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |