Department of Physics (Optometry), School of Sciences, University of Minho, Campus de Gualtar, Braga.
Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2010 Jan;30(1):108-12. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-1313.2009.00697.x.
This study proposes to evaluate the level of accuracy of intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements of a second generation rebound tonometer (IOPen, taking as references the Goldmann Applanation Tonometer (GAT) and the iCare rebound tonometer. The right eyes of 101 consecutive clinical patients were assessed with the three tonometers. The IOPen and iCare measurements were taken by two different optometrists and the GAT by an ophthalmologist. In this study, statistically significant differences were found when comparing the IOPen tonometer with the other two tonometers (p < 0.001). The IOPen underestimated the IOP value when compared to the GAT and the iCare (mean differences were 2.94 +/- 4.65 mmHg and 3.20 +/- 4.72 mmHg (mean +/- S.D.), respectively). The frequency distribution of differences demonstrated that in more than 55% of measurements the IOP readings differed by more than 3 mmHg between the IOPen and the GAT. Based on the present population study, these results suggest that IOPen measurements should be interpreted with caution.
本研究旨在评估第二代回弹眼压计(IOPen)测量眼压(IOP)的准确性水平,以 Goldmann 压平眼压计(GAT)和 iCare 回弹眼压计为参考。对 101 例连续临床患者的右眼分别使用三种眼压计进行评估。IOPen 和 iCare 的测量由两位不同的验光师进行,GAT 由眼科医生进行。本研究发现,IOPen 眼压计与其他两种眼压计相比存在统计学差异(p<0.001)。与 GAT 和 iCare 相比,IOPen 眼压计低估了 IOP 值(平均差异分别为 2.94 +/- 4.65 mmHg 和 3.20 +/- 4.72 mmHg(平均值 +/- S.D.))。差异的频率分布表明,在超过 55%的测量中,IOPen 和 GAT 之间的眼压读数差异超过 3 mmHg。基于目前的人群研究,这些结果表明,IOPen 测量值的解读应谨慎。