SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Glokom Katarakt / 2020 / Cilt: 15 - Sayı: 1

Comparison of the Intraocular Pressure Measurements with the Tono-Pen and the Goldmann Applanation Tonometer and the Effect of Central Corneal Thickness on Measurements

Mehmet Serdar DERVİŞOĞULLARI
Cengiz AKARSU
Ahmet ERGİN
Pages
27–32
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

This is contrary to expectations, based on the theory that TonoPen is least affected by the CCT because it needs smaller applanation area

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Purpose: Incorrect values of applanation tonometers according to varying corneal thickness were investigated many times.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Material and Methods: IOP was measured with Tono-Pen and GAT respectively in 255 patients’ eyes with normal corneas.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:This is contrary to expectations, based on the theory that TonoPen is least affected by the CCT because it needs smaller applanation area
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

Purpose: Incorrect values of applanation tonometers according to varying corneal thickness were investigated many times. In this study, we aimed to compare intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements of the Tono-Pen and Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT) in eyes with normal corneas of various thicknesses. Material and Methods: IOP was measured with Tono-Pen and GAT respectively in 255 patients’ eyes with normal corneas. Only the right eyes were analyzed for statistical purposes. Central corneal thickness (CCT) was measured using an ultrasound pachymeter after all IOP determinations had been made. Results: With both instruments, IOP varied with CCT. Readings with Tono-Pen showed a mean increase in IOP with increasing CCT of 0,18 mmHg/10μm and an increase of 0,16 mmHg/10 μm with the GAT. The Tono-Pen consistently recorded comparatively higher IOPs than the GAT (p<0,05). Conclusion: In our study, the difference between the Tono-Pen and GAT measurements is statistically insignifi cant and 60% of this difference is within the 1 mmHg range. Although it is thought that Tono-Pen may be less affected by corneal thickness due to the measurement from a smaller area we did not obtain data that Tono-Pen is less affected by corneal thickness as a result of linear regression analysis.The Tono-Pen is more affected by CCT when used to measure IOP in eyes with normal corneas. This is contrary to expectations, based on the theory that TonoPen is least affected by the CCT because it needs smaller applanation area

🔖

Cite This Article

DERVİŞOĞULLARI, M. S., AKARSU, C., ERGİN, A. (2020). Comparison of the Intraocular Pressure Measurements with the Tono-Pen and the Goldmann Applanation Tonometer and the Effect of Central Corneal Thickness on Measurements. Glokom Katarakt, Cilt: 15 - Sayı: 1, 27–32. https://ajindex.com/articles/226407

References (17)

  1. Tierney JP, Rubin ML. A clinical evaluation of the electronic applanation tonometer. Am J Ophthalmol. 1966;62:263-71
  2. Goldmann H. Schmidt T. Weiterer Beitrag zur Applantionstonometrie. Ophthalmologica. 1961;141:441-56
  3. Dielemans l, Vingerling JR, Hofman A, et al. Reliability of intraocular pressure measurement with the Goldmann applanation tonometer in epidemiological studies. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 1994;232:141-4
  4. Argus WA. Ocular hypertension and central corneal thickness. Ophthalmology 1995; 102:1810-2
  5. Rashad KM, Bahnassy AA. Changes in intraocular pressure after laser in situ keratomileusis. J Refract Surg. 2001;17:420-3
  6. Mark HH. Corneal curvature in applanation tonometry. Am J Ophthalmol. 1973;74:223-4
  7. Medeiros FA, Sample PA, Weinreb RN. Corneal thickness measurements and visual function abnormalities in ocular hypertensive patients. Am J Ophthalmol. 2003;135:131-7
  8. Giasson C, Forthomme D. Comparison of central corneal thickness measurements between optical and ultrasound pachometers. Opt Vis Sci. 1992;69:236-41
  9. Whitacre MM, Stein R. Sources of error with use of Goldmann-type tonometers. Surv Ophthalmol. 1993;38:1-30 10. Recep OF, Hasiripi H, Cagil N, et al. Relation between corneal thickness and intraocular pressure measurement by noncontact and applanation tonometer. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2001;27:1787-91
  10. Feltgen N, Leifert D, Funk J. Correlation between central corneal thickness, applanation tonometry and intracameral readings. Br J Ophthalmol. 2001;85:85-7
  11. Minckler DS, Baerveldt G, Heuer DK, et al. Clinical evaluation of Oculab Tono-Pen. Am J Ophthalmol. 1987;104:168-73
  12. Bordon AF, Katsumi O, Hirose T. Tonometry jm pediatric patients:A comparative study among Tono-Pen, Perkins and Schiotz tonometers. J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus. 1995;32:373-7
  13. Hessemer V, Rossler R, Jacobi K. Comparison of intraocular measurements with the Oculab Tono-Pen vs manometry in humans shortly after death. Am J Ophthalmol. 1988;105:678-82
  14. Foster PJ, Wong JS, Wong E. Acurracy of clinical estimates of intraocular pressure in Chinese eyes. Ophthalmology. 2000;107:1816-21
  15. Mermoud A, Baerveldt G, Minckler DS, et al. Intraocular pressure in Lewis rats. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1994; 35:2455-60
  16. Mermoud A, Baerveldt G, Minckler DS, et al. Measurement of rabbit intraocular pressure with the Tono-Pen. Ophthalmologica. 1995;209:275-7
  17. Eisenberg DL, Sherman BG, McKeown CA, et al. Tonometry in adult