Format

Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Ophthalmology. 2012 Aug;119(8):1552-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2012.02.030. Epub 2012 May 10.

Systematic review of the agreement of tonometers with Goldmann applanation tonometry.

Author information

1
Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK. j.a.cook@abdn.ac.uk

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

To assess the agreement of tonometers available for clinical practice with the Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT), the most commonly accepted reference device.

DESIGN:

A systematic review and meta-analysis of directly comparative studies assessing the agreement of 1 or more tonometers with the reference tonometer (GAT).

PARTICIPANTS:

A total of 11 582 participants (15 525 eyes) were included.

METHODS:

Summary 95% limits of agreement (LoA) were produced for each comparison.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:

Agreement, recordability, and reliability.

RESULTS:

A total of 102 studies, including 130 paired comparisons, were included, representing 8 tonometers: dynamic contour tonometer, noncontact tonometer (NCT), ocular response analyzer, Ocuton S, handheld applanation tonometer (HAT), rebound tonometer, transpalpebral tonometer, and Tono-Pen. The agreement (95% limits) seemed to vary across tonometers: 0.2 mmHg (-3.8 to 4.3 mmHg) for the NCT to 2.7 mmHg (-4.1 to 9.6 mmHg) for the Ocuton S. The estimated proportion within 2 mmHg of the GAT ranged from 33% (Ocuton S) to 66% and 59% (NCT and HAT, respectively). Substantial inter- and intraobserver variability were observed for all tonometers.

CONCLUSIONS:

The NCT and HAT seem to achieve a measurement closest to the GAT. However, there was substantial variability in measurements both within and between studies.

PMID:
22578443
DOI:
10.1016/j.ophtha.2012.02.030
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Elsevier Science
    Loading ...
    Support Center