Journal of glaucoma · 2017
A Comparative Analysis of Goldmann Tonometry Correction.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Asejczyk-Widlicka Magdalena, Srodka Wieslaw, Pierscionek Barbara K
Аннотация
PURPOSE: The measurement of intraocular pressure (IOP) by Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) is based on assumptions about corneal parameters. To correct for variations in corneal curvature and thickness, a number of equations have been proposed. This study evaluates the in vivo accuracy of these equations from individuals with primary open-angle glaucoma and compared them with measurements taken using the Pascal dynamic contour tonometer (DCT), which makes no assumptions about the corneal geometry or biomechanics.
PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: The study included 108 participants with primary open-angle glaucoma (47 male and 61 female) with an age range of 39 to 81 years. Participants were recruited from the Glaucoma Clinic at Wroclaw Medical University. A full ophthalmologic examination was conducted on all participants. Participants were divided into 3 groups depending on IOP as measured by GAT. Six formulae were applied and the results were compared with measurements taken with DCT.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: To determine as to which formula provides the closest value to IOP measured with DCT.
RESULTS: For IOP values ≤29 mm Hg, 2 of the formulae showed the smallest and comparable mean differences and SDs between corrected IOP values obtained with GAT and those measured with DCT. For IOP≥30 mm Hg, the formula derived from the model of corneal applanation that takes into account corneal buckling showed the closest agreement with measurements taken using DCT.
CONCLUSIONS: Correction formulae provide widely varying results and their appropriateness can depend on the IOP values.
PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: The study included 108 participants with primary open-angle glaucoma (47 male and 61 female) with an age range of 39 to 81 years. Participants were recruited from the Glaucoma Clinic at Wroclaw Medical University. A full ophthalmologic examination was conducted on all participants. Participants were divided into 3 groups depending on IOP as measured by GAT. Six formulae were applied and the results were compared with measurements taken with DCT.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: To determine as to which formula provides the closest value to IOP measured with DCT.
RESULTS: For IOP values ≤29 mm Hg, 2 of the formulae showed the smallest and comparable mean differences and SDs between corrected IOP values obtained with GAT and those measured with DCT. For IOP≥30 mm Hg, the formula derived from the model of corneal applanation that takes into account corneal buckling showed the closest agreement with measurements taken using DCT.
CONCLUSIONS: Correction formulae provide widely varying results and their appropriateness can depend on the IOP values.