Icare-Pro Rebound Tonometer Versus Hand-held Applanation Tonometer for Pediatric Screening

Arribas-Pardo, Paula; Méndez-Hernández, Carmen; Valls-Ferran, Isabel; Puertas-Bordallo, D.

doi:10.3928/01913913-20180621-01

Cited by 11 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…When used to take readings in young or uncooperative patients under anaesthesia, the handheld Perkins applanation tonometer is still considered as a reference device. However, the literature confirms reliable and repeatable measurements using rebound devices prior to RT200 in patients with PCG (Martinez‐de‐la‐Casa et al., 2009; Borrego Sanz et al., 2016; Arribas‐Pardo et al., 2018).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 85%

“…This was followed by reports of similar results using the iCare Pro (Borrego Sanz et al., 2016), which showed excellent agreement with PAT in patients with PCG examined under anaesthesia (ICC = 0.74), and in 64% the difference was < 3mmHg. Results were also much improved when measurements were compared between Icare Pro and PAT in healthy children (ICC = 0.857, and mean IOP difference between devices 0.26) (Arribas‐Pardo et al., 2018). The previous version to RT200 was iCare ic100, and while no study has examined its efficacy in PCG, in adults with glaucoma it has shown good agreement with Goldmann applanation tonometry (ICC = 0.93) (9).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…An elevated intraocular pressure (IOP) is the main modifiable risk factor for glaucoma. While Goldmann applanation tonometry is still the reference standard for pressure measurements, new tonometers based on different working principles are gradually being introduced into routine clinical practice (Arribas‐Pardo, Mendez‐Hernández, Valls‐Ferran, & Puertas‐Bordallo, 2018). For example, the rebound tonometer by iCare (Icare, Tiolat Oy, Helsinki, Finland) has a probe that minimally makes contact with the corneal surface and provides a pressure measurement calculated according to the probe's deceleration as it bounces off the cornea.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Agreement between rebound (Icare ic200) and applanation tonometry (Perkins) in patients with primary congenital glaucoma

Morales-Fernández

Pérez-García

Sáenz-Francés

et al. 2020

Acta Ophthalmologica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To examine agreement between intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements made using the rebound tonometer Icare ic200 (RT200) and the Perkins handheld applanation tonometer (PAT) in patients with primary congenital glaucoma (PCG). The impacts of several covariables on measurements using the two devices were also assessed. Materials and Methods Intraocular pressure measurements were made in a single session in 86 eyes of 86 patients with PCG (46 under anaesthesia, 40 in the office). The order was RT200 then PAT. The variables age, central corneal thickness (CCT), corneal state and anaesthesia were recorded in each patient. Data were compared by determining interclass correlation coefficients (ICC) for each tonometer and representing the differences detected as Bland–Altman plots. Effects of covariables were assessed through univariate and multivariate regression. Results Mean IOP difference between tonometers (RT200 minus PAT) was 1.26 mmHg (95%: 0.22–2.31). Absolute agreement (ICC) was 0.73 (95% CI: 0.62–0.82). Lower and upper limits of agreement (95%) were −8.06 mmHg (95% CI: −9.87 to −6.25) and 10.59 mmHg (95% CI: 8.77–12.40), respectively. The tonometers showed systematic differences (a = −4.63 mmHg; 95% CI: −9.11 to −1.44) and proportional differences; for each mmHg increase in PAT‐IOP, the RT200 reading increased by 1.28 mmHg (b = 1.28; 95% CI: 1.12–1.53). None of the variables tested as predictors were able to explain differences between the tonometers. Conclusions Despite the good overall agreement between both tonometers, caution should be taken in high values of IOP, considering the interchangeability of its readings as systematic and proportional differences appear to exist between both methods.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 85%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Agreement between rebound (Icare ic200) and applanation tonometry (Perkins) in patients with primary congenital glaucoma

Morales-Fernández

Pérez-García

Sáenz-Francés

et al. 2020

Acta Ophthalmologica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The deceleration of the probe is calculated into the IOP and displayed on the device after six rebounds per measurement [8, 9]. Due to its comfortableness and ease of use, iCare has gained much attention in clinical practice [10], especially in children [11]. Non-contact tonometer (NCT) is developed over 30 years [12].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparability of three intraocular pressure measurement: iCare pro rebound, non-contact and Goldmann applanation tonometry in different IOP group

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundMeasurement of intraocular pressure (IOP) is essential for glaucoma patients. Many factors such as central corneal thickness (CCT) can affect the accuracy of IOP measurement. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the agreement of IOP measured by non-contact tonometer (NCT), iCare pro rebound tonometer (iCare), and Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT) in different IOP group.MethodsThis was a Hospital-based cross-sectional study. Two hundred subjects were enrolled in this study. All subjects underwent IOP measurement using an NCT–iCare–GAT sequence. Bland-Altman, Pearson correlation and intraclass correlation analysis were performed using SPSS 17.0 software. The influence of CCT on each IOP measurement methods was evaluated by linear regression analysis.ResultsThe mean difference (Δ) of NCT–GAT did not differ from (Δ) iCare–GAT in IOP < 10 and 10–21 mmHg group. However, (Δ) NCT–GAT was significantly higher than (Δ) iCare–GAT in IOP 22–30 and > 30 mmHg group (P < 0.05). Bland–Altman analysis showed significant agreement between the three devices (P < 0.01). IOP measurements of the three methods were significantly correlated with CCT (P < 0.01).ConclusionsICare pro shows a higher agreement with GAT over a wide range of IOP compared with NCT. The consistency between the three tonometers was similar in a low and normal IOP range. However, NCT shows a greater overestimate of IOP in moderate and higher IOP group. The variability of IOP measurement affected by CCT is NCT > iCare pro > GAT.

show abstract

“…2 The introduction of new IOP measuring devices allows for complementary pressure measurements to GAT such that more measurements can be obtained in the ophthalmology office. [3][4][5] Icare200 (IC200, Tiolat Oy, Helsinki, Finland) is the new version of Icare (Fig. 1).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Corneal Biomechanical Properties on Rebound Tonometry (Icare200) and Applanation Tonometry (Perkins) Readings in Patients With Primary Congenital Glaucoma

Morales-Fernández

Sáenz-Francés

Pérez-García

et al. 2021

Journal of Glaucoma

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The aim was to assess the influence of corneal biomechanics on intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements made with the Icare200 (IC200) rebound tonometer and the Perkins handheld applanation tonometer in patients with primary congenital glaucoma (PCG).Materials and Methods: A total of 40 PCG patients and 40 healthy controls, age, and sex-matched, were recruited. IOP was measured with the Ocular Response Analyzer (IOPc, IOPg), IC200 and Perkins. The variables age, IOP, corneal hysteresis (CH), corneal resistance factor (CRF), central corneal thickness (CCT), bestcorrected visual acuity, spherical equivalent, medications, and glaucoma surgeries were recorded for each subject. Univariate and multivariate analysis were used to detect effects of variables on IOP measurements.

show abstract

Icare-Pro Rebound Tonometer Versus Hand-held Applanation Tonometer for Pediatric Screening

Cited by 11 publications

References 18 publications

Agreement between rebound (Icare ic200) and applanation tonometry (Perkins) in patients with primary congenital glaucoma

Agreement between rebound (Icare ic200) and applanation tonometry (Perkins) in patients with primary congenital glaucoma

Comparability of three intraocular pressure measurement: iCare pro rebound, non-contact and Goldmann applanation tonometry in different IOP group

Effects of Corneal Biomechanical Properties on Rebound Tonometry (Icare200) and Applanation Tonometry (Perkins) Readings in Patients With Primary Congenital Glaucoma

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About