Article Text

Download PDFPDF

A comparison of four methods of tonometry: method agreement and interobserver variability
Free
  1. P-A Tonnu1,
  2. T Ho1,
  3. K Sharma1,
  4. E White1,
  5. C Bunce2,
  6. D Garway-Heath1
  1. 1Glaucoma Research Unit, Moorfields Eye Hospital, London EC1V 2PD, UK
  2. 2Department of Research and Development, Moorfields Eye Hospital, London EC1V 2PD, UK
  1. Correspondence to: D F Garway-Heath MD, FRCOphth, Glaucoma Research Unit, Moorfields Eye Hospital, London EC1V 2PD, UK; david.garway-heathmoorfields.nhs.uk

Abstract

Aim: To compare the inter-method agreement in intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements made with four different tonometric methods.

Methods: IOP was measured with the Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT), Tono-Pen XL, ocular blood flow tonograph (OBF), and Canon TX-10 non-contact tonometer (NCT) in a randomised order in one eye of each of 105 patients with ocular hypertension or glaucoma. Three measurements were made with each method, and by each of two independent GAT observers. GAT interobserver and tonometer inter-method agreement was assessed by the Bland-Altman method. The outcome measures were 95% limits of agreement for IOP measurements between GAT observers and between tonometric methods, and 95% confidence intervals for intra-session repeated measurements.

Results: The mean differences (bias) in IOP measurements were 0.4 mm Hg between GAT observers, and 0.6 mm Hg, 0.1 mm Hg, and 0.7 mm Hg between GAT and Tono-Pen, OBF, and NCT, respectively. The 95% limits of agreement were smallest (bias ±2.6 mm Hg) between GAT observers, and larger for agreement between the GAT and the Tono-Pen, OBF, and NCT (bias ±6.7, ±5.5, and ±4.8 mm Hg, respectively). The OBF and NCT significantly underestimated GAT measurements at lower IOP and overestimated these at higher IOP. The repeatability coefficients for intra-session repeated measurement for each method were ±2.2 mm Hg and ±2.5 mm Hg for the GAT, ±4.3 mm Hg for the Tono-Pen, ±3.7 mm Hg for the OBF, and ±3.2 mm Hg for the NCT.

Conclusions: There was good interobserver agreement with the GAT and moderate agreement between the NCT and GAT. The differences between the GAT and OBF and between the GAT and Tono-Pen probably preclude the OBF and Tono-Pen from routine clinical use as objective methods to measure IOP in normal adult eyes.

  • CCT, central corneal thickness
  • GAT, Goldmann applanation tonometer
  • IOP, intraocular pressure
  • NCT, non-contact tonometer
  • OBF, ocular blood flow
  • OHT, ocular hypertension
  • tonometry
  • intraocular pressure
  • comparative study
  • repeatability
  • CCT, central corneal thickness
  • GAT, Goldmann applanation tonometer
  • IOP, intraocular pressure
  • NCT, non-contact tonometer
  • OBF, ocular blood flow
  • OHT, ocular hypertension
  • tonometry
  • intraocular pressure
  • comparative study
  • repeatability

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Footnotes

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.