Suppr超能文献

使用OBF眼压描记仪测量眼压和脉搏率——与参考仪器的比较。

Intraocular pressure and pulse rate measurements by the OBF tonograph--comparison to reference instruments.

作者信息

Yang Y C, Illango B, Cook A, Batterbury M

机构信息

St Paul's Eye Unit, Royal Liverpool University Hospital, UK.

出版信息

Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2000 Sep;20(5):401-7.

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of intraocular pressure (IOP) and ocular pulse rate (OPR) measurements obtained by the Ocular Blood Flow (OBF) tonograph (OBF Labs, Wiltshire, UK). Measurements of IOP and OPR by the OBF tonograph were compared to those of reference instruments. For IOP evaluation, measurements were obtained on patients with normal and abnormal pressures using the OBF tonograph and the Goldmann applannation tonometer in random alternate order. For the OPR evaluation, measurements were obtained using the OBF tonograph with simultaneous heart rate monitoring by ECG on patients with normal IOP. The validity of the OBF tonograph measurements was quantified in terms of 95% limits of agreement and their relationships to measurements by reference instruments was determined by linear regression analyses. 102 patients were recruited for IOP measurements. Mean IOP obtained by the Goldmann tonometer was 20.7 mmHg (7-42 mmHg, SD 6.98) whilst mean IOP obtained by the OBF tonograph was 20.1 mmHg (8.1-40.2, SD 6.1). Goldmann IOP and OBF tonograph IOP readings were well correlated (r = 0.945). Analysis of the difference in IOP measurements between two instruments (tonograph minus Goldmann tonometer) showed the mean bias to be 0.26 mmHg (-7.8 to +6.1 mmHg) and the 95% limits of agreement to be -4.35 to +4.87 mmHg. Agreement between two instruments appeared to be dependent on the IOP; at IOP lower than 20.6 mmHg there was an overall tendency for the tonograph IOP to be higher than Goldmann IOP and vice versa when IOP was above 20.6 mmHg. 47 patients were recruited for OPR and ECG measurements. Mean pulse rates were 74.8 beats per min (mean 43-110) by ECG and 73.9 beats per min (43-110) by tonography. Analysis of the difference in pulse rate between instruments (tonograph OPR minus ECG pulse rate) against the average pulse rate showed the mean bias to be -0.8 beats and the 95% limits of agreement to be between -7 to +5 beats. Ocular pulse rate values obtained by the OBF tonograph were very accurate when compared to ECG pulse rate. This indicates that there is unlikely to be a systematic lag in continuous ocular pulse waveform recording. Intraocular pressure measurements by the OBF tonograph correlated very well with Goldmann readings over a wide range of pressures and should be valid in the clinical setting.

摘要

本研究的目的是评估由眼血流(OBF)眼压计(OBF Labs,英国威尔特郡)获得的眼压(IOP)和眼脉搏率(OPR)测量值的准确性。将OBF眼压计测量的IOP和OPR与参考仪器的测量值进行比较。对于IOP评估,使用OBF眼压计和Goldmann压平眼压计以随机交替顺序对眼压正常和异常的患者进行测量。对于OPR评估,对IOP正常的患者使用OBF眼压计并通过心电图同步监测心率来获取测量值。OBF眼压计测量值的有效性通过95%一致性界限进行量化,并通过线性回归分析确定其与参考仪器测量值的关系。招募了102名患者进行IOP测量。Goldmann眼压计测得的平均IOP为20.7 mmHg(7 - 42 mmHg,标准差6.98),而OBF眼压计测得的平均IOP为20.1 mmHg(8.1 - 40.2,标准差6.1)。Goldmann眼压计和OBF眼压计的IOP读数相关性良好(r = 0.945)。对两种仪器(眼压计减去Goldmann眼压计)的IOP测量差异进行分析,结果显示平均偏差为0.26 mmHg(-7.8至+6.1 mmHg),95%一致性界限为-4.35至+4.87 mmHg。两种仪器之间的一致性似乎取决于眼压;当眼压低于20.6 mmHg时,眼压计的IOP总体上有高于Goldmann眼压计的趋势,而当眼压高于20.6 mmHg时则相反。招募了47名患者进行OPR和心电图测量。心电图测得的平均脉搏率为每分钟74.8次(平均43 - 110次),眼压计测量的平均脉搏率为每分钟73.9次(43 - 110次)。将仪器之间的脉搏率差异(眼压计OPR减去心电图脉搏率)与平均脉搏率进行分析,结果显示平均偏差为-0.8次,95%一致性界限为-7至+5次。与心电图脉搏率相比,OBF眼压计获得的眼脉搏率值非常准确。这表明在连续眼脉搏波形记录中不太可能存在系统性延迟。在很宽的压力范围内,OBF眼压计测量的眼压与Goldmann读数相关性非常好,在临床环境中应该是有效的。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验