Comparison of intraocular pressure readings with Perkins, Tonopen, iCare 200, and iCare Home to manometry in cadaveric eyes.

AIM

To compare intraocular pressure (IOP) readings obtained with Perkins tonometry, iCare Home, iCare 200, and Tonopen to IOP readings obtained with the manometer of a perfusion system to assess the accuracy and reproducibility of each method of tonometry at set pressures.

METHODS

The IOP of human cadaveric eyes (=2) was measured using a manometer inserted into the eye through the optic nerve. IOP measurements were obtained using a Perkins tonometer, iCare Home, iCare 200, and Tonopen. These measurements were compared to set point IOP measurements of a manometer to determine accuracy and reproducibility of each device.

RESULTS

Mean IOP readings obtained with the Perkins tonometer compared to manometer readings demonstrated a difference of -1.0±5.0 mm Hg (=0.45), indicating a lower reading on average than manometery although not significant. Mean IOP difference between iCare 200 and manometer was 5.3±2.2 mm Hg (<0.0001). Mean difference in IOP between iCare Home and manometer was 3.5±2.4 mm Hg (=0.0004). Mean IOP difference compared to manometer was 4.6±4.0 mm Hg for the Tonopen (<0.0001). IOP measurements obtained with the Perkins tonometer demonstrated a standard deviation of 5.0 mm Hg while the Tonopen measurements demonstrated a 4.0 mm Hg standard deviation. In comparison, iCare 200 and iCare Home demonstrated 2.2 and 2.4 mm Hg standard deviation, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Applanation tonometry produces more accurate IOP readings than rebound tonometry or Tonopen, however it demonstrates greater variability than the other forms of tonometry. Rebound tonometry is more reproducible but tends to over-estimate IOP.