Comparison of intraocular pressure measurements with the tono-pen, goldmann applanation tonometer, and noncontact tonometer in nonglaucomatous pseudophakic children
Comparison of intraocular pressure measurements with the tono-pen, goldmann applanation tonometer, and noncontact tonometer in nonglaucomatous pseudophakic children

Comparison of intraocular pressure measurements with the tono-pen, goldmann applanation tonometer, and noncontact tonometer in nonglaucomatous pseudophakic children

Int Ophthalmol. 2024 Jun 27;44(1):285. doi: 10.1007/s10792-024-03210-w.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the agreement between the Goldman applanation tonometer (GAT), Tono-Pen, and noncontact tonometer (NCT) in the measurement of intraocular pressure (IOP) in pseudophakic children.

METHODS: The medical records of nonglaucomatous pseudophakic children between 2009 and 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. A total of 46 eyes of 23 patients operated for bilateral pediatric cataract were included in the study. The patients’ mean age was 13.4 ± 4.1 years. Central corneal thickness (CCT) and IOP values measured with the GAT, Tono-Pen, and NCT were recorded. Agreement between the tonometers was evaluated by intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and the Bland-Altman method.

RESULTS: The mean IOP of the 46 eyes included in the study was measured as 13.7 ± 2.3 mm Hg with the GAT, 16.0 ± 2.3 mm Hg with NCT, and 16.5 ± 2.3 mm Hg with the Tono-Pen (p < 0.001). There is no statistical difference between NCT and Tono-Pen measurements, while GAT measurements were significantly lower than those of the NCT and Tono-pen. ICC values showed fair agreement between NCT and Tono-Pen (ICC = 0.720), whereas there was poor agreement between GAT and NCT (ICC = 0.501) and Tono-pen (ICC = 0.314).

CONCLUSIONS: With all devices included in the study, thicker corneas were associated with higher IOP measurements. Although there was moderate agreement between the NCT and Tono-Pen, there was a statistically significant difference in the IOP values provided by the three devices. Our results suggest these devices should not be used interchangeably.

PMID:38935310 | DOI:10.1007/s10792-024-03210-w