Comparison of Disposable Goldmann Applanation Tonometer, ICare ic100, and Tonopen XL to Standards of Care Goldmann Nondisposable Applanation Tonometer for Measuring Intraocular Pressure

Wong, Benny; Parikh, Deep; Rosen, Lisa; Gorski, Matthew; Angelilli, Allison; Shih, Carolyn

doi:10.1097/ijg.0000000000001059

Cited by 24 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The trend toward overestimation of IOP with iC100 in ocular hypertension and glaucoma with elevated IOPs was also observed using the Bland–Altman 13 graphs (Figure 2), as in previous studies 7 with rebound tonometers versus GAT, between 1.8 and 4 mm Hg, according to the groups ( p < 0.05). Similar results were found in the recent study by Wong et al, 18 who compared the IOP measurements between GAT, iC100, and Tonopen XL in patients with suspected or diagnosed glaucoma and concluded that iC100 overestimated IOP versus GAT by 1.24–1.8 mm Hg ( p < 0.001).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

“…Despite this, there is some controversy with rebound tonometry, since in some studies there has been an increase in direct IOP as the corneal thickness increases, 27 in others specifically from 550 μm in thickness, 28 while in some studies have not found significant differences in the measurement of CCT between two devices, influencing more factors such as corneal characteristics, corneal hysteresis, and corneal resistance factor. 7,29–31 In the study conducted by Wong et al, 18 a weak but statistically significant correlation between iC100 and CCT was also found. The consensus of the different publications indicates that the rebound tonometry is affected by the corneal thickness in the same way as in the case of applanation tonometry.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 80%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Analysis of reproducibility, evaluation, and preference of the new iC100 rebound tonometer versus iCare PRO and Perkins portable applanation tonometry

Molero-Senosiain

Morales-Fernández

Sáenz-Francés

et al. 2019

European Journal of Ophthalmology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: To analyze the reproducibility of the new iC100 rebound tonometer, to compare its results with the applanation tonometry and iCare PRO and to evaluate the preference between them. Materials and methods: For the study of reproducibility, 15 eyes of 15 healthy Caucasian subjects were included. Three measurements were taken each day in three separate sessions. For the comparative study, 150 eyes of 150 Caucasian subjects were included (75 normal subjects and 75 patients with glaucoma). Three consecutive measurements were collected with each tonometer, randomizing the order of use. The discomfort caused by each tonometer was evaluated using the visual analogue scale. Results: No statistically significant differences were detected between sessions. In the comparison between tonometers, the measurements with iC100 were statistically lower than those of Perkins (−1.35 ± 0.417, p = 0.004) and that iCare PRO (−1.41 ± 0.417, p = 0.002). The difference between PRO and Perkins was not statistically significant ( p = 0.990). The mean time of measurement (in seconds) with iC100 was significantly lower than with Perkins (6.74 ± 1.46 vs 15.53 ± 2.01, p < 0.001) and that PRO (6.74 ± 1.46 vs 11.53 ± 1.85, p < 0.001). Visual analogue scale score with iC100 was lower than Perkins (1.33 ± 0.99 vs 1.73 ± 1.10, p < 0.05). In total, 61.7% preferred iC100 against Perkins. Conclusion: The reproducibility of this instrument has been proven good. iC100 underestimates intraocular pressure compared to applanation tonometry at normal values and tends to overestimate it in high intraocular pressure values. Most of the subjects preferred iC100 tonometer.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 80%

Analysis of reproducibility, evaluation, and preference of the new iC100 rebound tonometer versus iCare PRO and Perkins portable applanation tonometry

Molero-Senosiain

Morales-Fernández

Sáenz-Francés

et al. 2019

European Journal of Ophthalmology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The tonometer uses a disposable probe; therefore, there is no risk of cross infection. Research studies have demonstrated generally good agreement between Icare tonometry and GAT 20–24. The Icare tonometer automatically takes six readings per eye in quick succession, with the average reading displayed as the final IOP measurement.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Feeling the pressure: a cross-sectional study exploring feasibility of a healthcare Pop-Up for intraocular pressure measurements in shopping centres in England

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesTo test the hypothesis that a shopping centre Pop-Up health check combining an intraocular pressure (IOP) check with a general health check (blood pressure (BP)) is more readily accepted by the general public than an IOP check only. We investigate public awareness of IOP compared with BP and the feasibility of measuring IOP in large numbers in a Pop-Up.DesignA cross-sectional study using a tailor-made healthcare Pop-Up.SettingThe ‘Feeling the Pressure’ Pop-Up was sited in eight regionally-different shopping centres in England.ParticipantsAdult members of the public in shopping centres.MethodsOn one day we measured IOP only and on another measured BP and IOP. IOP was measured by Icare IC100 tonometer (Helsinki, Finland). Potential participants were asked about their awareness of IOP and BP and when they last visited their optometrist.ResultsMore people attended the combined BP + IOP days (461; 60%; 95% CI 56% to 64%) than IOP-only days (307; 40%, 95% CI 37% to 43%) over 16 days of testing. We recorded IOP in 652 participants (median (IQR) age and IOP of 54 (42 to 68) years and 13 (11 to 15) mm Hg, respectively). Fewer people reported awareness about IOP (19%, 95% CI 16% to 23%) compared with BP (71%, 95% CI 66% to 75%). Of 768 participants, 60 (8%) reported no previous optometric eye examination and 185 (24%) reported >2 years since their most recent examination.ConclusionsMeasuring IOP in large numbers of the public via a shopping centre Pop-Up is feasible. Public engagement was greater when a BP check was offered alongside an IOP check, suggesting unfamiliar health checks can be promoted by aligning them with a more familiar check. Our findings hint at strategies for public health schemes that engage the public with their eye health.

show abstract

“…Tonopen XL, may display the lower agreement with the other tonometers. [ 44 ] Both icare and Tonopen tend to overestimate the GAT IOP values in eyes with thicker corneas (CCT values more than 555 μm). [ 45 ] We would, therefore, recommend repeating measurements twice, especially where high values are suspected.…”

Section: Rebound and Contact Applanation Tonopentonometrymentioning

confidence: 99%

Guidelines and recommendations for tonometry use during the COVID-19 era

Almazyad

Ameen

Khan

et al. 2020

Middle East Afr J Ophthalmol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The novel coronavirus disease COVID-19 caused by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) has resulted in a substantial change in eye care and clinical practice. There has been conflicting information and weak evidence on the virus's transmission through tears. Yet, virus detection on cornea and conjunctiva surface as a gateway for infection is not well-studied. Moreover, there have been no reported cases of SARS-CoV-2 transmission through tonometry to date. Thus, this uncertainty has urged this review on evidence-based guidelines and recommendations on tonometer use in the COVID-19 era. The aim of this article is to provide ophthalmologists with recommendations for tonometry practice based on current evidence and best practice guidelines.

show abstract

Comparison of Disposable Goldmann Applanation Tonometer, ICare ic100, and Tonopen XL to Standards of Care Goldmann Nondisposable Applanation Tonometer for Measuring Intraocular Pressure

Cited by 24 publications

References 32 publications

Analysis of reproducibility, evaluation, and preference of the new iC100 rebound tonometer versus iCare PRO and Perkins portable applanation tonometry

Analysis of reproducibility, evaluation, and preference of the new iC100 rebound tonometer versus iCare PRO and Perkins portable applanation tonometry

Feeling the pressure: a cross-sectional study exploring feasibility of a healthcare Pop-Up for intraocular pressure measurements in shopping centres in England

Guidelines and recommendations for tonometry use during the COVID-19 era

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About