COMPARISON OF INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE MEASURED WITH GOLDMANN APPLANATION TONOMETER AND NON-CONTACT AIR-PUFF TONOMETER

Hidayatullah Mahsud, Muhammad Wali Saleem, Rafiq Muhammad, Muhammad Saleem, Mirqad Ayaz

Abstract


Background: Intraocular pressure measurement (IOP) is of pivotal importance for the diagnosis and management of glaucoma. The objective of this study was to compare intraocular pressure measurement with Goldmann Applanation tonometer (GAT) and non-contact Air-Puff tonometer (APT).
Material & Methods: This comparative cross-sectional study was conducted at outpatient Department of Ophthalmology, District Headquarters Teaching Hospital, Bannu, Pakistan, from October 2015 to February 2016. The IOP was measured first with APT (Canon Full Auto Tonometer TX-F, Japan) followed by its measurement with GAT (HAAG-STRIET AT 900, Koeniz Switzerland)
Results: This study included 200 eyes of 100 patients. Among 100 patients, 57(57%) were males and 43(43%)
were females. Age range was from 16 to 78 years with a mean of 42.5 years. The IOP measured with APT ranged from 10 mmHg to 47mmHg with a mean of 18.17+8.25 mmHg, while IOP recorded with GAT ranged from 10 mmHg to 41mmHg with a mean of 15.59+7.75 mmHg. There was a significant difference in the mean IOP measured with APT and GAT, with APT recording a mean IOP of 2.58 mmHg higher than GAT (p=0.003).
Conclusion: Both APT and GAT are commonly used for IOP measurement. There is a reasonably good agreement between the two tonometers at IOP within the normal range. However GAT is more accurate and reliable. APT overestimates IOP, particularly in cases above the upper limit of normal IOP. The results of APT should be confirmed with GAT, particularly when the IOP exceeds the normal range for the diagnosis and treatment of glaucoma.

Keywords


Ocular Tonometry; Intraocular pressure; Glaucoma.

Full Text:

PDF

References


Quigley HA, Broman AT. Number of people with Glaucoma worldwide in 2010 and 2020. Br J Ophthalmol 2006; 90: 262-7.

Kass MA, Hener DK, Higginbotham EJ, Johnson CA, Keltner JL, Miller JP, 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; 120:701-13.

Nakamoto K, Yasuda N, Fukuda T. Correlation of age and intraocular pressure with visual field damage in patients with normal-tension glaucoma. Nihon Ganka Gakki Zasshi 2008; 112:371-5.

Chihara E. Assessment of true intraocular pressure: the gap between theory and practical data. Surv Ophthalmol 2008; 53:203-18.

Wells AP, Garway-Heath DF, Poostchi A, Wong T, Chan KC, Sachdev N. Corneal hysteresis but not corneal thickness correlates with optic nerve surface compliance in glaucoma patients. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2008; 49:3262-8.

Anderson DR. Collaborative normal tension glaucoma study. Curr Opin Ophthalmol2003; 14:86-90.

Mahdavi KN, Hoffmann D, Coleman AL, Liu G, Li G, Gaasterland D et al. Predictive factors for glaucomatous

visual field progression in the advance glaucoma intervention study. Ophthalmology

; 111:1627-35.

HeijlA, Leske MC, Bengtsson B, Hyman L, Hussein M. Reduction of intraocular pressure and glaucoma progression: Results from the Early Manifest Glaucoma Trial. Arch Ophthalmol 2002; 120:1268-79.

Leske MC, Heijl A, Hussein M, Bengtsson B, Hyman L, Konaroff E. factors for glaucoma progression and the effect of treatment: the Early Manifest Glaucoma Trial. Arch Ophthalmol 2003; 121:48-56.

Kniestedt C, Punjabi O, Lin S, Stamper RL. Tonometry through ages. Surv Ophthalmol 2008; 53:568-91.

Almubrad TM, Ogbuehi KC. The effect of repeated applanation on subsequent IOP measurement. ClinExpOptom 2008; 91:524-9.

Ahmad J, Khan MR, Azhar MN, Arain TM, Qazi ZA. Accuracy of IOP measured by non-contact (Air-Puff) tonometer compared with Goldmannapplanation tonometer. Pak J Ophthalmol 2014; 30:20-3.

Rao HV, Rao GH, Babu PVS, Subrahmanyam M. Comparative study of measurement of IOP with Goldmann’sapplanation tonometer and Non-contact tonometer. International J Health Research Modern Integrated Med Sci 2015; 2:19-21.

Salim S, Linn DJ, Echols JR, Netland PA. Comparison of intraocular pressure measurements with the portable PT100 noncontact tonometer and Goldmann applanation tonometer. Clin Ophthalmol 2009; 3:341-4.

Nadeem S, Naeem BA, Tahira R, Khalid S, Hannan A. Comparison of Goldmann applanation, Diaton transpalpebral and Air Puff tonometers. Pak J Ophthalmol 2015;31:33-9.

Al-Mubrad TM. Performance of the PT100 noncontact tonometer in healthy eyes. Clin Ophthalmol 2011; 5:611-6.

Shah MA, Saleem KB, Mehmood T. Intraocular pressure measurement: Goldmann applanation tonometer vs noncontact Air Puff tonometer. J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad 2012; 24:21-4.

Farhood QK. Comparative evaluation of intraocular pressure with air-puff tonometer versus Goldmann applanation tonometer. Clin Ophthalmol 2013;7:23-7.

Ogbuehi KC, Al-Mubrad TM. Accuracy and reliability of the Keeler PulsairEasyEye noncontact tonometer. Optom Vis Sci 2008;85:61-6.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2016 Gomal Journal of Medical Sciences



© 2011 Gomal Journal of Medical Sciences