The ICare tonometer can be useful in a routine clinical setting. The IOP readings are quite in accordance with those obtained by GAT. The measurements seemed to be influenced by CCT variations, and thus pachymetry should always be taken into consideration.

ABSTRACT.Purpose: To compare intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements taken with Pascal dynamic contour tonometry (DCT), the TonoPen and the Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT). The influence of central corneal thickness (CCT) on IOP measurements taken with Pascal DCT and the TonoPen was evaluated.Methods: One eye in each of 101 consecutive patients with primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) underwent ultrasonic CCT measurement and IOP evaluation with GAT, Pascal DCT and the TonoPen in random order. The agreement between results from Pascal DCT and the TonoPen and those of GAT was assessed using the Bland)Altman method. The deviation of Pascal DCT and TonoPen readings from GAT values, corrected for CCT, was calculated and correlated to CCT using a linear regression model. Results:The mean of the differences in IOP measurements was 3.2 ± 2.4 mmHg for Pascal DCT minus GAT readings and 0.5 ± 4.5 mmHg for TonoPen minus GAT readings. The 95% confidence interval of differences in IOP measurements was higher between TonoPen and GAT readings () 6 to 7 mmHg) than between Pascal and GAT readings (0.1)6.8 mmHg). Pascal DCT significantly overestimated IOP compared with GAT, especially for higher IOP readings. Bland)Altman scatterplots showed reasonable inter-method agreement between Pascal DCT and GAT measurements, and poor agreement between TonoPen and GAT measurements. The deviations of Pascal DCT and TonoPen readings from the corrected GAT values were both highly correlated with CCT values (linear regression analysis, p < 0.0001). The mean change in measured IOP for a 10-lm increase in CCT was 0.48 mmHg for Pascal DCT and 0.74 mmHg for the TonoPen.Conclusions: Agreement with GAT measurements was higher for Pascal DCT than for TonoPen readings; however, Pascal DCT significantly overestimated IOP values compared with GAT. Measurements of IOP obtained with both Pascal DCT and the TonoPen appeared to be influenced by CCT, and this influence appeared to be greater for the latter.

Corvis-ST precision was excellent for IOP and CCT; moderate for CDPs. Corvis-ST underestimated GAT IOP, especially at higher IOP and at lower corneal deformability levels. GAT and Corvis-ST IOP increased in thicker and less deformable corneas. Glaucoma patients showed significantly less deformable corneas than controls.