In this in vitro model on human corneas, CCL resulted in an overestimation of true IOP by all the tested tonometers. Although the magnitude of this effect was small, care should be taken when measuring IOP with GAT after CCL, as it results in less accurate, much more variable IOP readings.

No abstract

ABSTRACT.Purpose: We present a prototype of the hand-held dynamic contour tonometer (HH-DCT) and prospectively compare this HH-DCT with the well-established Perkins applanation tonometer (PAT) and the TonoPenXL (TPXL). Methods: In a prospective, single-centre, randomized study, intraocular pressure (IOP) readings were taken in random order using HH-DCT, PAT and TPXL tonometers. Intra-observer variability was calculated for each observer and compared between three experienced ophthalmologists and an inexperienced medical student. Results: Ninety-two corneas of 92 healthy participants were enrolled. IOP [mean mmHg ± standard deviation (SD)] as measured by HH-DCT was 16.97 ± 2.71, by PAT 13.98 ± 2.52 and by TPXL 13.34 ± 2.68. The range of three consecutive IOP readings differed significantly between the devices [p < 0.001; mean range: 1.45 ± 1.07 (HH-DCT), 1.87 ± 0.97 (PAT) and 2.08 ± 1.77 (TPXL)]. There was no difference of the range in all devices between the ophthalmologists and the medical student (HH-DCT p = 0.68, PAT p = 0.54, TPXL p = 0.48). Conclusion: IOP readings measured by HH-DCT are significantly higher than by PAT and TPXL. The differences of IOP measurements are in good accordance with previous studies using the slit-lamp-mounted DCT (SL-DCT) and Goldmann Applanation Tonometry, where SL-DCT readings were 1-3.2 mmHg higher. HH-DCT seems to give more constant results, which can be seen in the lower intra-observer variability compared to PAT and TPXL.