Aviso: para depositar documentos, por favor, inicia sesión e identifícate con tu cuenta de correo institucional de la UCM con el botón MI CUENTA UCM. No emplees la opción AUTENTICACIÓN CON CONTRASEÑA
 

Performance of the rebound, noncontact and Goldmann applanation tonometers in routine clinical practice

dc.contributor.authorMartínez De La Casa Fernández-Borrella, José María
dc.contributor.authorJimenez-Santos, M
dc.contributor.authorSaenz Frances, F
dc.contributor.authorMatilla-Rodero, M
dc.contributor.authorMéndez Hernández, Carmen Dora
dc.contributor.authorHerrero Vanrell, María Del Rocío
dc.contributor.authorGarcía Feijoo, Julián
dc.date.accessioned2024-08-05T08:07:40Z
dc.date.available2024-08-05T08:07:40Z
dc.date.issued2011
dc.description.abstractPurpose: To compare rebound tonometry (RBT) and noncontact tonometry (NCT) using Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) as reference. Methods: The study sample was comprised of 108 eyes of 108 subjects consecutively examined at a general ophthalmology clinic. The order of use of the three tonometers was randomized at the study outset. The difference between the methods was plotted against the mean to compare the tonometers. The hypothesis of zero bias was examined by a paired t-test and 95% limits of agreement (LoA) were also calculated. Differences with respect to GAT were assessed according to the international standard for ocular tonometers (ISO 8612). Results: Mean intraocular pressures (IOPs ± SD) obtained using the three instruments were GAT 17.5 ± 3.8 mmHg; RBT 18.5 ± 5.5 mmHg and NCT 17.4 ± 5.6 mmHg. The 95% LoA were from -7.9 to +7.7 mmHg for NCT-GAT and from -6.8 mmHg to +8.7 mmHg for RBT-GAT. A difference with respect to GAT under ±1 mmHg was observed in 11.1% of the eyes measured by NCT and 18.5% of eyes measured by RBT. According to the IOP ranges established by the ISO 8612, differences from GAT measurements greater than ±5 mmHg were always above the accepted level of 5%. Correlations between IOP and central corneal thickness (CCT) were significant for all three tonometers. Conclusions: The rebound and noncontact tonometer behaved similarly when used to measure IOP taking GAT measurements as the reference standard. Neither tonometer fulfilled ISO 8612 requirements. Both were similarly influenced by CCT. © 2009 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2009 Acta Ophthalmol.
dc.description.departmentDepto. de Inmunología, Oftalmología y ORL
dc.description.facultyFac. de Medicina
dc.description.refereedTRUE
dc.description.statuspub
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/J.1755-3768.2009.01774.X
dc.identifier.officialurlhttps://doi.org/10.1111/J.1755-3768.2009.01774.X
dc.identifier.relatedurlhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdfdirect/10.1111/j.1755-3768.2009.01774.x
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/107367
dc.issue.number7
dc.journal.titleActa Ophthalmologica
dc.language.isoeng
dc.page.final680
dc.page.initial676
dc.publisherWiley
dc.rights.accessRightsrestricted access
dc.subject.cdu617.7
dc.subject.keywordGlaucoma
dc.subject.keywordTonometry
dc.subject.keywordRebound
dc.subject.keywordGoldmann
dc.subject.keywordIcare
dc.subject.keywordIntraocular pressure
dc.subject.keywordNoncontact
dc.subject.ucmOftalmología
dc.subject.unesco3201.09 Oftalmología
dc.titlePerformance of the rebound, noncontact and Goldmann applanation tonometers in routine clinical practice
dc.typejournal article
dc.type.hasVersionVoR
dc.volume.number89
dspace.entity.typePublication
relation.isAuthorOfPublication273a99c3-2c9f-4dd0-8939-b7ff3593124c
relation.isAuthorOfPublication533dd90f-2b34-4a5f-9cf8-ab8d19454edd
relation.isAuthorOfPublicatione19672b5-d6f7-400a-b591-b903bc396955
relation.isAuthorOfPublication558b8023-6d72-4dff-9f99-2e60f6f31843
relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscovery273a99c3-2c9f-4dd0-8939-b7ff3593124c

Download

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Performance_of_Tonometers_Martinez-de-la-Casa_2011_Acta_Ophthalmologica.pdf
Size:
261.3 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format

Collections