Advertisement

Comparison of intraocular pressure measured by iCare tonometers and Goldmann applanation tonometer

      Abstract

      Objective

      To evaluate the relationship between the Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT) and the iCare PRO and iCare IC200 tonometers in measuring intraocular pressure (IOP) in adult eyes with a diagnosis of glaucoma or glaucoma suspect.

      Participants and methods

      One hundred and one eyes from 101 participants diagnosed with glaucoma or glaucoma suspect were evaluated in this study. IOP was measured by iCare PRO and iCare IC200 tonometers in a randomized sequence followed by IOP measurements by the GAT tonometer and then central corneal thickness measurements. After the IOP measurements, participants scored their comfort level using a visual analog scale with each tonometer. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Bland–Altman analysis were used to investigate the agreement among tonometers. SPSS and Microsoft Excel programs were used for statistical analysis.

      Results

      Overall, there was good agreement among the 3 tonometers used in this study. The ICC for the iCare PRO and the iCare IC200 was 0.95 (p < 0.001), and the ICC for the iCare PRO and the GAT and the iCare IC200 and the GAT was >0.80 (p < 0.001). However, both iCare tonometers underestimated IOP by approximately 2 mm Hg compared with the GAT. Furthermore, 84% of iCare readings fall within ±5 mm Hg of GAT measurements. Neither body mass index nor central corneal thickness affected the IOP agreement among the tonometers. Participant response on visual analog scale rated IOP measurements by iCare tonometers to be more comfortable than the GAT.

      Conclusion

      Our results demonstrated a good agreement between iCare tonometers and GAT; but iCare tonometers underestimated IOP compared to the GAT.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Canadian Journal of Ophthalmology
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Aziz K
        • Friedman DS.
        Tonometers—which one should I use?.
        Eye (Lond). 2018; 32: 931-937
        • Pakrou N
        • Gray T
        • Mills R
        • Landers J
        • Craig J.
        Clinical comparison of the Icare tonometer and Goldmann applanation tonometry.
        J Glaucoma. 2008; 17: 43-47
        • Kass MA.
        Standardizing the measurement of intraocular pressure for clinical research: Guidelines from the Eye Care Technology Forum.
        Ophthalmology. 1996; 103: 183-185
        • Kim KN
        • Jeoung JW
        • Park KH
        • Yang MK
        • Kim DM.
        Comparison of the new rebound tonometer with Goldmann applanation tonometer in a clinical setting.
        Acta Ophthalmol. 2013; 91: e392-e396
        • Yildiz A
        • Yasar T.
        Comparison of Goldmann applanation, non-contact, dynamic contour and tonopen tonometry measurements in healthy and glaucomatous eyes, and effect of central corneal thickness on the measurement results.
        Med Glas (Zenica). 2018; 15: 152-157
        • Poostchi A
        • Mitchell R
        • Nicholas S
        • Purdie G
        • Wells A.
        The iCare rebound tonometer: comparisons with Goldmann tonometry, and influence of central corneal thickness.
        Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2009; 37: 687-691
        • Nakakura S.
        Icare rebound tonometers: review of their characteristics and ease of use.
        Clin Ophthalmol. 2018; 12: 1245-1253
        • Nakakura S
        • Mori E
        • Yamamoto M
        • Tsushima Y
        • Tabuchi H
        • Kiuchi Y.
        Intradevice and interdevice agreement between a rebound tonometer, Icare PRO, and the Tonopen XL and Kowa hand-held applanation tonometer when used in the sitting and supine position.
        J Glaucoma. 2015; 24: 515-521
        • Grewal DS
        • Stinnett SS
        • Folgar FA
        • et al.
        A comparative study of rebound tonometry with Tonopen and Goldmann applanation tonometry following vitreoretinal surgery.
        Am J Ophthalmol. 2016; 161: 22-28
        • Rateb M
        • Abdel-Radi M
        • Eldaly Z
        • Elmohamady MN
        Noor El Din A. Comparison of IOP measurement by Goldmann applanation tonometer, iCare rebound tonometer, and Tono-Pen in keratoconus patients after MyoRing implantation.
        J Ophthalmol. 2019; 20191964107
        • Nakakura S
        • Mori E
        • Fujio Y
        • et al.
        Comparison of the intraocular pressure measured using the new rebound tonometer iCare IC100 and iCare TA01i or Goldmann applanation tonometer.
        J Glaucoma. 2019; 28: 172-177
        • Munkwitz S
        • Elkarmouty A
        • Hoffmann EM
        • Pfeiffer N
        • Thieme H.
        Comparison of the iCare rebound tonometer and the Goldmann applanation tonometer over a wide IOP range.
        Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2008; 246: 875-879
        • Brusini P
        • Salvetat ML
        • Zeppieri M
        • Tosoni C
        • Parisi L.
        Comparison of iCare tonometer with Goldmann applanation tonometer in glaucoma patients.
        J Glaucoma. 2006; 15: 213-217
        • Rodter TH
        • Knippschild S
        • Baulig C
        • Krummenauer F.
        Meta-analysis of the concordance of iCare PRO-based rebound and Goldmann applanation tonometry in glaucoma patients.
        Eur J Ophthalmol. 2020; 30: 245-252
        • Nakakura S
        • Asaoka R
        • Terao E
        • et al.
        Evaluation of rebound tonometer iCare IC200 as compared with iCare PRO and Goldmann applanation tonometer in patients with glaucoma.
        Eye Vis (Lond). 2021; 8: 25
        • Badakere SV
        • Chary R
        • Choudhari NS
        • Rao HL
        • Garudadri C
        • Senthil S.
        Agreement of intraocular pressure measurement of iCare IC200 with Goldmann applanation tonometer in adult eyes with normal cornea.
        Ophthalmol Glaucoma. 2021; 4: 89-94
        • Kato Y
        • Nakakura S
        • Matsuo N
        • et al.
        Agreement among Goldmann applanation tonometer, iCare, and iCare PRO rebound tonometers; non-contact tonometer; and Tonopen XL in healthy elderly subjects.
        Int Ophthalmol. 2018; : 687-696
        • Guler M
        • Bilak S
        • Bilgin B
        • Simsek A
        • Capkin M
        • Hakim Reyhan A.
        Comparison of intraocular pressure measurements obtained by iCare PRO rebound tonometer, Tomey FT-1000 noncontact tonometer, and Goldmann applanation tonometer in healthy subjects.
        J Glaucoma. 2015; 24: 613-618
        • Schweier C
        • Hanson JV
        • Funk J
        • Toteberg-Harms M.
        Repeatability of intraocular pressure measurements with iCare PRO rebound, Tono-Pen AVIA, and Goldmann tonometers in sitting and reclining positions.
        BMC Ophthalmol. 2013; 13: 44
        • Phelps CD
        • Phelps GK.
        Measurement of intraocular pressure: a study of its reproducibility.
        Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 1976; 198: 39-43
        • Dielemans I
        • Vingerling JR
        • Hofman A
        • Grobbee DE
        • de Jong PT.
        Reliability of intraocular pressure measurement with the Goldmann applanation tonometer in epidemiological studies.
        Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 1994; 232: 141-144
        • Baek SU
        • Ha A
        • Kim YK
        • Jeoung JW
        • Park KH.
        Effect of manual eyelid manipulation on intraocular pressure measurement by rebound tonometry.
        Br J Ophthalmol. 2018; 102: 1515-1519
        • Park DH
        • Choi WS
        • Yoon SH
        • Song CH.
        Anthropometry of Asian eyelids by age.
        Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008; 121: 1405-1413
        • Na JI
        • Kwon OS
        • Kim BJ
        • et al.
        Ethnic characteristics of eyelashes: a comparative analysis in Asian and Caucasian females.
        Br J Dermatol. 2006; 155: 1170-1176
        • Lee GA
        • Ritch R
        • Liang SY
        • et al.
        Tight orbit syndrome: a previously unrecognized cause of open-angle glaucoma.
        Acta Ophthalmol. 2010; 88: 120-124
        • Lee YK
        • Lee JY
        • Moon JI
        • Park MH.
        Effectiveness of the iCare rebound tonometer in patients with overestimated intraocular pressure due to tight orbit syndrome.
        Jpn J Ophthalmol. 2014; 58: 496-502
        • Wong B
        • Parikh D
        • Rosen L
        • Gorski M
        • Angelilli A
        • Shih C.
        Comparison of disposable Goldmann applanation tonometer, iCare IC100, and Tonopen XL to standards of care Goldmann nondisposable applanation tonometer for measuring intraocular pressure.
        J Glaucoma. 2018; 27: 1119-1124
        • Sakamoto M
        • Kanamori A
        • Fujihara M
        • Yamada Y
        • Nakamura M
        • Negi A.
        Assessment of iCare ONE rebound tonometer for self-measuring intraocular pressure.
        Acta Ophthalmol. 2014; 92: 243-248
        • Schuman JS
        • Massicotte EC
        • Connolly S
        • Hertzmark E
        • Mukherji B
        • Kunen MZ.
        Increased intraocular pressure and visual field defects in high resistance wind instrument players.
        Ophthalmology. 2000; 107: 127-133
        • van Angelen MI
        • van Angelen JH
        • Zegers RH.
        [A saxophonist with severe glaucoma; stop playing or not?].
        Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2014; 158: A6709
        • Kass MA
        • Heuer DK
        • Higginbotham EJ
        • et al.
        The Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study: a randomized trial determines that topical ocular hypotensive medication delays or prevents the onset of primary open-angle glaucoma.
        Arch Ophthalmol. 2002; 120 (discussion 829–30.): 701-713
        • Punjabi OS
        • Kniestedt C
        • Stamper RL
        • Lin SC.
        Dynamic contour tonometry: principle and use.
        Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2006; 34: 837-840
        • Moreno-Montanes J
        • Maldonado MJ
        • Garcia N
        • Mendiluce L
        • Garcia-Gomez PJ
        • Segui-Gomez M.
        Reproducibility and clinical relevance of the ocular response analyzer in nonoperated eyes: corneal biomechanical and tonometric implications.
        Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2008; 49: 968-974
        • Yang K
        • Xu L
        • Fan Q
        • Zhao D
        • Ren S.
        Repeatability and comparison of new Corvis ST parameters in normal and keratoconus eyes.
        Sci Rep. 2019; 9: 15379