Repeatability, reproducibility, and agreement of three tonometers for measuring intraocular pressure in rabbits.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Bertens CJF
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8478901 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Icare PRO (ICP) is a new Rebound tonometer that is able to measure intraocular pressure (IOP) in both sitting and reclining positions. In this study, the gold standard Goldmann tonometer (GAT) was compared to ICP and Tono-Pen AVIA (TPA). Hypothesis was that repeatability of GAT is superior to ICP and TPA.36 eyes of 36 healthy caucasian individuals, 13 male and 26 females, 17 right and 19 left eyes have been included in this prospective, randomized, cross-sectional study. The study was conducted at a single site (Dept. of Ophthalmology, University Hospital Zurich, Switzerland). Primary outcome measures were Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and coefficients of variation (COV) and test-retest repeatability as visualized by Bland-Altman analysis. Secondary outcome measures were IOP in sitting (GAT, ICP and TPA) and in reclining (ICP and TPA) position.Mean IOP measured by GAT was 14.9 ± 3.5 mmHg. Mean IOP measured by ICP was 15.6 ± 3.1 mmHg (with TPA 14.8 ± 2.7 mmHg) in sitting and 16.5 ± 3.5 mmHg (with TPA 17.0 ± 3.0 mmHg) in reclining positions. COVs ranged from 2.9% (GAT) to 6.9% (ICP reclining) and ICCs from 0.819 (ICP reclining) to 0.972 (GAT).Repeatability is good with all three devices. GAT has higher repeatability compared to the two tested hand-held devices with lowest COVs and highest ICCs. IOP was higher in the reclining compared to the sitting position.The study was registered to the Clinical Trials Register of the US National Institute of Health, NCT01325324.
| S-EPMC3844420 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This study aimed to compare intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements in healthy pediatric patients using three types of tonometers.Seventy-eight eyes of 78 patients under the age of 18 who underwent a routine ophthalmologic examination were included in the study. IOP was measured using Tono-Pen (TP) tonometry, Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT), and non-contact tonometry (NCT), consecutively. IOP was adjusted based on central corneal thickness (CCT). Patients with any ocular disorders other than a limited refractive error were excluded from the study.The study consisted of 46 girls and 32 boys. The mean age was 12.6±2.7 (range: 5-17) years. The mean CCT was 559.3±35.3 µm. The mean refractive error was -0.50±1.70. The mean level of visual acuity was 0.98±0.1 (range: 0.3-1.0) using the Snellen chart. Significant differences were found between the measurement results of each of the three tonometric methods. Mean IOP was 12.1±2.2 mmHg for TP, 15.7±2.5 mmHg for GAT, and 17.1±3.1 mmHg for NCT. The correlations between measurement methods revealed that the highest correlation was between NCT and GAT (p<0.001, r=0.670). The second highest correlation was between NCT and TP (p<0.001, r=0.477). The lowest correlation was between GAT and TP (p<0.001, r=0.403). A positive correlation was found between CCT and each IOP measurement method.In pediatric patients, TP and NCT measurements were found to be positively correlated with GAT measurements. Because TP measurements were lower than GAT measurements and NCT measurements were higher than GAT measurements, patient follow-ups, treatment strategies, and surgery plans must be organized taking these differences into consideration.
| S-EPMC5282535 | biostudies-other
Project description:PurposeTo evaluate repeatability, reproducibility, and agreement of intraocular pressure measurement with Tono-Pen using Ocufilm and polyethylene wrap tip cover in human eyes.MethodsThis is a cross-sectional, experimental study. A gas-sterilized, polyethylene wrap was used as an alternative for Tono-Pen tip cover. For the right eye, 4 measurements using polyethylene wrap tip cover were done by two examiners (A and B) in random order to assess intra-observer repeatability and inter-observer reproducibility. For the left eye, 4 measurements were done by examiner A using both polyethylene wrap tip cover and Ocufilm in random order to assess intra-observer repeatability and agreement. Bland-Altman plot and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were used in all analyses. Cost minimization analysis was evaluated.ResultsFor examiner A, the repeatability of polyethylene wrap tip cover was -0.34, 95% limits of agreement (LOA) were -3.04 to 2.36, and ICC was 0.93 in the right eyes. As for the left eyes, the repeatability of polyethylene wrap tip cover was -0.33, 95% LOA were -3.01 to 2.36, and ICC was 0.93. For examiner B, the repeatability of polyethylene wrap tip cover was -0.02, 95% LOA were -2.88 to 2.83, and ICC was 0.92. The inter-observer reproducibility of polyethylene wrap tip cover was 0.36, 95% LOA were -3.34 to 4.07, and ICC was 0.90. The repeatability of Ocufilm was -0.42, 95% LOA were -2.75 to 1.91, and ICC was 0.95. The agreement of polyethylene wrap tip cover and Ocufilm was -0.71, 95% LOA were -5.18 to 3.76, and ICC was 0.83. There were no allergic reactions or serious complications. From the cost minimization analysis, the local cost for polyethylene tip cover was approximately 8 times lower compared to Ocufilm.ConclusionsTono-pen with Ocufilm and polyethylene wrap tip cover were used to measure the intraocular pressure. The polyethylene wrap tip cover demonstrated acceptable repeatability, reproducibility, and agreement with Ocufilm in normotensive eyes, and had a good safety profile.
| S-EPMC7521710 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTo evaluate the repeatability, the reproducibility and the agreement of foveal avascular zone (FAZ) measurements using three different optical coherence tomography angiography (OCT-A) devices.ProceduresThis prospective study included 24 eyes of 24 healthy volunteers. OCT-A imaging was performed using RTVue XR Avanti, Canon OCT-HS100 and Spectralis OCT-A. Repeated measurements were performed under the same conditions on two separate days, and the area of the FAZ was determined and analyzed using the above devices.ResultsAll three devices showed a high ICC and there was no significant difference between the ICCs (pairwise comparison) of the three devices (Optovue-Canon (p = 0.66); Canon-Heidelberg (p = 0.21); Heidelberg-Optovue (p = 0.37). Agreement analysis of the three devices revealed a significant elevation of FAZ area values with the Heidelberg device and a slight underestimation of the FAZ area with the Canon device. Nevertheless, overall we found a high level of agreement between all of the three devices (ICC ? 0.958 (0.905-0.982)).ConclusionsGood reproducibility and repeatability were observed for all three devices. However, the agreement analysis revealed slight, but significant differences, which might limit alternating use of these devices for clinical research and follow-up examinations.
| S-EPMC6193722 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This study aimed to compare intraocular pressures (IOP) using different tonometers, Goldmann applanation (IOPGAT), non-contact (IOPNCT), and rebound (IOPRBT), and to assess the effects of aging and central corneal thickness (CCT) on the measurements. The IOPGAT, IOPNCT, IOPRBT, mean patient age (65.1 ± 16.2 years), and CCT (521.7 ± 39.2 µm) were collected retrospectively from 1054 eyes. The differences among IOPs were compared by the paired t-test. Possible correlations between devices, age, and CCT were assessed by linear regression analyses. The effects of age and CCT on the IOP reading were assessed by mixed-effects regression models. The IOPGAT values were 2.4 and 1.4 mmHg higher than IOPNCT and IOPRBT, respectively; the IOPNCT was 1.0 mmHg lower than IOPRBT (p < 0.0001 for all comparisons). The IOPs measured by each tonometer were highly correlated with each other (r = 0.81-0.90, t = 45.2-65.5). The linear regression analyses showed that age was negatively correlated with IOPNCT (r = -0.12, t = -4.0) and IOPRBT (r = -0.14, t = -4.5) but not IOPGAT (r = 0.00, t = -0.2); the CCT was positively correlated with IOPGAT (r = 0.13, t = 4.3), IOPNCT (r = 0.29, t = 9.8), and IOPRBT (r = 0.22, t = 7.2). The mixed-effect regression models showed significant negative correlations between age and IOPNCT (t = -2.6) and IOPRBT (t = -3.4), no correlation between age and IOPGAT (t = 0.2), and a significant positive correlation between CCT and the tonometers (t = 3.4-7.3). No differences between IOPGAT and IOPRBT were seen at the age of 38.8 years. CCT affects IOPs from all tonometers; age affects IOPNCT and IOPRBT in different degrees. IOPRBT tended to be higher than IOPGAT in young subjects, but this stabilized in middle age and became higher in older subjects.
| S-EPMC8471438 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PURPOSE:To investigate the associations between intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements obtained by different tonometric methods and rates of visual field loss in a cohort of patients with glaucoma followed over time. DESIGN:Prospective, observational cohort study. PARTICIPANTS:This study included 213 eyes of 125 glaucomatous patients who were followed for an average of 2.4±0.6 years. METHODS:At each visit, IOP measurements were obtained using Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT), the Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA) (Reichert, Inc., Depew, NY), corneal-compensated IOP (IOPcc), and the ICare Rebound Tonometer (RBT) (Tiolat, Oy, Helsinki, Finland). Rates of visual field loss were assessed by standard automated perimetry (SAP) mean deviation (MD). Linear mixed models were used to investigate the relationship between mean IOP by each tonometer and rates of visual field loss over time, while adjusting for age, race, central corneal thickness, and corneal hysteresis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Strength of associations (R2) between IOP measurements from each tonometer and rates of SAP MD change over time. RESULTS:Average values for mean IOP over time measured by GAT, ORA, and RBT were 14.4±3.3, 15.2±4.2, and 13.4±4.2 mmHg, respectively. Mean IOPcc had the strongest relationship with SAP MD loss over time (R2 = 24.5%) and was significantly different from the models using mean GAT IOP (R2 = 11.1%; 95% confidence interval [CI] of the difference, 6.6-19.6) and mean RBT IOP (R2= 5.8%; 95% CI of the difference, 11.1-25.0). CONCLUSIONS:Mean ORA IOPcc was more predictive of rates of visual field loss than mean IOP obtained by GAT or RBT. By correcting for corneal-induced artifacts, IOPcc measurements may present significant advantages for predicting clinically relevant outcomes in patients with glaucoma.
| S-EPMC6882426 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To assess the agreement of intraocular pressure (IOP) measured with the Tono-Pen and the Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT) in normal children and adolescents.A total of 439 subjects from birth to <18 years of age without anterior segment anomalies or glaucoma had their IOP measured with the two instruments by separate, masked examiners in the office or under general anesthesia.On average, the Tono-Pen measured values slightly lower than the GAT for IOP <11 mm Hg and slightly higher than the GAT for IOP >11 mm Hg in the office setting. Using the average of GAT and Tono-Pen IOPs to estimate the true IOP, the average difference (GAT - Tono-Pen) was 0.4 mm Hg at IOP of 10 mm Hg and -3.0 mm Hg at IOP of 20 mm Hg. The 95% limits of agreement on the average difference between instruments were ± 6.4 mm Hg in the office setting and ± 6.8 mm Hg under general anesthesia. Larger differences between instruments were found with younger age. Standard error of measurement with the Tono-Pen was 1.44 mm Hg and 1.82 mm Hg for the office and anesthesia settings, respectively. Thicker corneas were associated with higher IOP with both the GAT and the Tono-Pen.In normal children, average differences between IOP measured by Tono-Pen and GAT were small, although there was substantial test-retest variability. Younger age was associated with larger average differences, as was higher IOP in the office setting.
| S-EPMC3428123 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTo evaluate the repeatability and reproducibility of corneal power measurements obtained by Topcon KR-1W and iTrace, and assess the agreement with measurements obtained by Allegro Topolyzer and IOLMaster.MethodsThe right eyes of 100 normal subjects were prospectively scanned 3 times using all the 4 devices. Another observer performed additional 3 consecutive scans using the Topcon KR-1W and iTrace in the same session. About one week later, the first observer repeated the measurements using the Topcon KR-1W and iTrace. The steep keratometry (Ks), flat keratometry (Kf), mean keratometry (Km), J0 and J45 were analyzed. Repeatability and reproducibility of measurements were evaluated by the within-subject standard deviation (Sw), coefficient of variation (CoV), test-retest repeatability (2.77Sw), and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Agreements between devices were assessed using Bland-Altman analysis and 95% limits of agreement (LoA).ResultsIntraobserver repeatability and interobserver and intersession reproducibility of the Ks, Kf and Km showed a CoV of no more than 0.5%, a 2.77Sw of 0.70 D or less, and an ICC of no less than 0.99. However, J0 and J45 showed poor intraobserver repeatability and interobserver and intersession reproducibility (all ICCs not greater than 0.446). Statistically significant differences existed between Topcon KR-1W and IOLMaster, Topcon KR-1W and iTrace, Topcon KR-1W and Topolyzer, iTrace and Topolyzer, iTrace and IOLMaster for Ks, Kf and Km measurements (all P < 0.05). The mean differences between Topcon KR-1W, iTrace, and the other 2 devices were small. The 95% LoA were approximately 1.0 D to 1.5 D for all measurements.ConclusionsThe Ks, Kf and Km obtained by Topcon KR-1W and iTrace showed excellent intraobserver repeatability and interobserver and intersession reproducibility in normal eyes. The agreement between Topcon KR-1W and Topolyzer, Topcon KR-1W and IOLMaster, iTrace and Topolyzer, iTrace and IOLMaster, Topcon KR-1W and iTrace were not so good, they should not be interchangeable in clinical application. Given that the intraobserver repeatability and interobserver and intersession reproducibility of corneal astigmatism measurements obtained by Topcon KR-1W and iTrace were poor, it should be cautious that Topcon KR-1W and iTrace were applied for the preparation of toric lens implantation.
| S-EPMC4709181 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTo investigate whether corneal thickness parameters measured by optical coherence tomography (OCT), such as central corneal thickness (CCT), central corneal stromal thickness (CCST), and central corneal epithelial thickness (CCET), influence the intraocular pressure (IOP) difference measured by Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) and non-contact tonometry (NCT).MethodsIn total, 50 eyes from 50 subjects without glaucomatous defects were included in this retrospective, cross-sectional study. We measured IOP using GAT and NCT and calculated the difference between the two methods. CCT was measured by a Cirrus HD-OCT device using anterior segment imaging. The basement membrane of the epithelium, which was seen as a high-reflection line in the OCT image, was taken as a reference line to measure CCST and CCET.ResultsThe mean IOP measured by GAT and NCT was 16.7 ± 3.0 and 18.1 ± 3.8 mmHg, respectively. The mean IOP difference was 1.5 ± 1.7 mmHg, and the IOP measured by NCT was 8.4% ± 11.3% higher than that measured by GAT. The CCET and CCST were 57.9 ± 5.6 and 501.7 ± 33.8 ?m, respectively. CCT showed a positive correlation with both GAT IOP (r = 0.648, P < 0.001) and NCT IOP (r = 0.676, P < 0.001). Although CCST showed a significant correlation with GAT IOP and NCT IOP, CCET did not. The difference between GAT IOP and NCT IOP increased with CCT (r = 0.333, P = 0.018), and CCET was positively correlated with the IOP difference between GAT and NCT (r = 0.435, P = 0.002).ConclusionsIOP increased with greater CCT, and CCST seemed to have a more important role than CCET. CCET also increased with greater CCT, and this may be a possible explanation for the increasing difference in IOP between GAT and NCT with increasing CCT.
| S-EPMC4801388 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The purpose of the study was to investigate the accuracy of two corrected intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements by Corvis Scheimpflug Technology (CST)-IOPpachy and by corneal-compensated IOP (IOPcc) using the Reichert 7CR (7CR) tonometers. We also investigated the effects of corneal anatomical and structural parameters on the IOP measurements. The participants included 90 primary open-angle glaucoma patients. We assessed the IOP measurements, obtained by the CST, 7CR, and Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT), using a paired t-test with Bonferroni correction, Bland-Altman plots, and multiple regression analyses. The 7CR-IOPcc gave the highest value (15.5 ± 2.7 mmHg), followed by the 7CR-IOPg (13.7 ± 3.1 mmHg), GAT-IOP (13.6 ± 2.2 mmHg), CST-IOP (10.3 ± 2.6 mmHg), and CST-IOPpachy (9.7 ± 2.5 mmHg). The values of CST-IOPpachy were significantly lower than those obtained by the other IOP measurement methods (all, p < 0.01). The values of 7CR-IOPcc were significantly higher than those obtained by the other IOP measurement methods (all, p < 0.01). Bland-Altman plots showed a mean difference between the GAT-IOP and the other IOP measurements (CST-IOP, CST-IOPpachy, 7CR-IOPg, and 7CR-IOPcc), which were -3.20, -3.82, 0.14, and 2.00 mmHg, respectively. The widths of the 95% limits of agreement between all pairs of IOP measurements were greater than 3 mmHg. With the exception of the 7CR-IOPcc, all of the IOP variations were explained by regression coefficients involving gender, average corneal curvature, and central corneal thickness. The IOP values obtained by the GAT, CST, and 7CR were not interchangeable. Each new IOP measurement device that was corrected for ocular structure had its own limitations.
| S-EPMC5240967 | biostudies-literature