Comparison of first, second, and third versus the average of six probe-corneal touches for intraocular measurement of two rebound tonometers in healthy horses

•Measuring intraocular pressure in horses can be challenging.•First probe-corneal touch measurements (PCT) had good agreement with the average.•89.5% and 78.9% first PCT were within 4 mmHg of the average of six PCT measurements. The aim of this study was to evaluate the intraocular pressure (IOP) me...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of equine veterinary science 2024-05, Vol.136, p.105074-105074, Article 105074
Hauptverfasser: Okur, S., Yanmaz, L.E., Çınar, H., Gölgeli, A., Orhun, Ö.T., Turgut, F., Şenocak, M.G., Arslan, T.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 105074
container_issue
container_start_page 105074
container_title Journal of equine veterinary science
container_volume 136
creator Okur, S.
Yanmaz, L.E.
Çınar, H.
Gölgeli, A.
Orhun, Ö.T.
Turgut, F.
Şenocak, M.G.
Arslan, T.
description •Measuring intraocular pressure in horses can be challenging.•First probe-corneal touch measurements (PCT) had good agreement with the average.•89.5% and 78.9% first PCT were within 4 mmHg of the average of six PCT measurements. The aim of this study was to evaluate the intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements obtained from first, second, and third probe-cornea touch (PCT) and compare them with the average of six PCTs using two rebound tonometers in horses. This study enrolled a total of thirty-eight stallions, comprising of 24 Arabian horses and 14 cross-breeds (with an average age of 8 ± 3 years). The IOP measurements of first, second, and third, as well as the average of six PCTs were obtained using either Tonovet (TV) or Tonovet Plus (TV+) rebound tonometers. The mean differences (95% limits of agreement) between the average of six PCTs and the first, second, and third PCTs were 0.1 (-4.8 to 5), 0.2 (-4.8 to 4.5), and 0.2 (-3.6 to 4.0) mmHg with TV, respectively. With TV+, the differences were 0.3 (-6.6 to 7.2), 1.1 (-8.6 to 10.8), and -0.2 (-3.6 to 4.0) mmHg, respectively. Compared to the average of six PCTs, only 89.5%, 92.1%, and 97.4% of IOP measurements obtained from TV and 78.9%, 73.3%, and 65.8% of IOP measurements obtained from TV+ were within 4 mmHg of the average of six PCTs for first, second, and third PCTs, respectively. In conclusion, the measurement of IOP in the first PCT achieved best agreement with the IOP measurement of six average PCTs. Therefore, the first PCT could be considered as an alternative option for measuring IOP in horses when obtaining an average of six PCTs is not feasible.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.jevs.2024.105074
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3045116234</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0737080624000807</els_id><sourcerecordid>3153591492</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c340t-1315b584f08449319c7a21bcffa1f7f56981791a7134e812341752e48442f383</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkc2O1DAQhCMEYoeFF-CAfOSwGdy28ydxQSP-pJW47N1ynDbxKIkHtzPsvgzPiqNZOMLJbeurKrmrKF4D3wOH-t1xf8Qz7QUXKj9UvFFPih1USpSNAvG02PFGNiVveX1VvCA6ci4qUPJ5cSXbWrUd73bFr0OYTyZ6CgsLjjkfKd0wQhuW4YaZZWBp9HFgZ4y0Ur4gM3k233HDyd-zUww9ljbEBc3EUljtiMRciMwvKZpg18lENqOhNeKMS9qE6WdgEfuwbgFhCTOmHJAVbMwuaXxgY4iE9LJ45sxE-OrxvC7uPn28O3wpb799_nr4cFtaqXgqQULVV61yvFWqk9DZxgjorXMGXOOqumuh6cA0IBW2IKSCphKoMi2cbOV18fZimz_zY0VKevZkcZrMgmElne1l1YHqxP9RriqAOkdkVFxQGwNRRKdP0c8mPmjgemtQH_XWoN4a1JcGs-jNo__azzj8lfypLAPvLwDmfZw9Rk3W42Jx8BFt0kPw__L_DYZ_riU</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3045116234</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of first, second, and third versus the average of six probe-corneal touches for intraocular measurement of two rebound tonometers in healthy horses</title><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Okur, S. ; Yanmaz, L.E. ; Çınar, H. ; Gölgeli, A. ; Orhun, Ö.T. ; Turgut, F. ; Şenocak, M.G. ; Arslan, T.</creator><creatorcontrib>Okur, S. ; Yanmaz, L.E. ; Çınar, H. ; Gölgeli, A. ; Orhun, Ö.T. ; Turgut, F. ; Şenocak, M.G. ; Arslan, T.</creatorcontrib><description>•Measuring intraocular pressure in horses can be challenging.•First probe-corneal touch measurements (PCT) had good agreement with the average.•89.5% and 78.9% first PCT were within 4 mmHg of the average of six PCT measurements. The aim of this study was to evaluate the intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements obtained from first, second, and third probe-cornea touch (PCT) and compare them with the average of six PCTs using two rebound tonometers in horses. This study enrolled a total of thirty-eight stallions, comprising of 24 Arabian horses and 14 cross-breeds (with an average age of 8 ± 3 years). The IOP measurements of first, second, and third, as well as the average of six PCTs were obtained using either Tonovet (TV) or Tonovet Plus (TV+) rebound tonometers. The mean differences (95% limits of agreement) between the average of six PCTs and the first, second, and third PCTs were 0.1 (-4.8 to 5), 0.2 (-4.8 to 4.5), and 0.2 (-3.6 to 4.0) mmHg with TV, respectively. With TV+, the differences were 0.3 (-6.6 to 7.2), 1.1 (-8.6 to 10.8), and -0.2 (-3.6 to 4.0) mmHg, respectively. Compared to the average of six PCTs, only 89.5%, 92.1%, and 97.4% of IOP measurements obtained from TV and 78.9%, 73.3%, and 65.8% of IOP measurements obtained from TV+ were within 4 mmHg of the average of six PCTs for first, second, and third PCTs, respectively. In conclusion, the measurement of IOP in the first PCT achieved best agreement with the IOP measurement of six average PCTs. Therefore, the first PCT could be considered as an alternative option for measuring IOP in horses when obtaining an average of six PCTs is not feasible.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0737-0806</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1542-7412</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jevs.2024.105074</identifier><identifier>PMID: 38648909</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Cornea ; Horse ; Intraocular pressure ; measurement ; Rebound ; stallions ; Tonometry ; veterinary medicine</subject><ispartof>Journal of equine veterinary science, 2024-05, Vol.136, p.105074-105074, Article 105074</ispartof><rights>2024 Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c340t-1315b584f08449319c7a21bcffa1f7f56981791a7134e812341752e48442f383</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-2620-897X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0737080624000807$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27903,27904,65309</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38648909$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Okur, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yanmaz, L.E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Çınar, H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gölgeli, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Orhun, Ö.T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Turgut, F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Şenocak, M.G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Arslan, T.</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of first, second, and third versus the average of six probe-corneal touches for intraocular measurement of two rebound tonometers in healthy horses</title><title>Journal of equine veterinary science</title><addtitle>J Equine Vet Sci</addtitle><description>•Measuring intraocular pressure in horses can be challenging.•First probe-corneal touch measurements (PCT) had good agreement with the average.•89.5% and 78.9% first PCT were within 4 mmHg of the average of six PCT measurements. The aim of this study was to evaluate the intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements obtained from first, second, and third probe-cornea touch (PCT) and compare them with the average of six PCTs using two rebound tonometers in horses. This study enrolled a total of thirty-eight stallions, comprising of 24 Arabian horses and 14 cross-breeds (with an average age of 8 ± 3 years). The IOP measurements of first, second, and third, as well as the average of six PCTs were obtained using either Tonovet (TV) or Tonovet Plus (TV+) rebound tonometers. The mean differences (95% limits of agreement) between the average of six PCTs and the first, second, and third PCTs were 0.1 (-4.8 to 5), 0.2 (-4.8 to 4.5), and 0.2 (-3.6 to 4.0) mmHg with TV, respectively. With TV+, the differences were 0.3 (-6.6 to 7.2), 1.1 (-8.6 to 10.8), and -0.2 (-3.6 to 4.0) mmHg, respectively. Compared to the average of six PCTs, only 89.5%, 92.1%, and 97.4% of IOP measurements obtained from TV and 78.9%, 73.3%, and 65.8% of IOP measurements obtained from TV+ were within 4 mmHg of the average of six PCTs for first, second, and third PCTs, respectively. In conclusion, the measurement of IOP in the first PCT achieved best agreement with the IOP measurement of six average PCTs. Therefore, the first PCT could be considered as an alternative option for measuring IOP in horses when obtaining an average of six PCTs is not feasible.</description><subject>Cornea</subject><subject>Horse</subject><subject>Intraocular pressure</subject><subject>measurement</subject><subject>Rebound</subject><subject>stallions</subject><subject>Tonometry</subject><subject>veterinary medicine</subject><issn>0737-0806</issn><issn>1542-7412</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkc2O1DAQhCMEYoeFF-CAfOSwGdy28ydxQSP-pJW47N1ynDbxKIkHtzPsvgzPiqNZOMLJbeurKrmrKF4D3wOH-t1xf8Qz7QUXKj9UvFFPih1USpSNAvG02PFGNiVveX1VvCA6ci4qUPJ5cSXbWrUd73bFr0OYTyZ6CgsLjjkfKd0wQhuW4YaZZWBp9HFgZ4y0Ur4gM3k233HDyd-zUww9ljbEBc3EUljtiMRciMwvKZpg18lENqOhNeKMS9qE6WdgEfuwbgFhCTOmHJAVbMwuaXxgY4iE9LJ45sxE-OrxvC7uPn28O3wpb799_nr4cFtaqXgqQULVV61yvFWqk9DZxgjorXMGXOOqumuh6cA0IBW2IKSCphKoMi2cbOV18fZimz_zY0VKevZkcZrMgmElne1l1YHqxP9RriqAOkdkVFxQGwNRRKdP0c8mPmjgemtQH_XWoN4a1JcGs-jNo__azzj8lfypLAPvLwDmfZw9Rk3W42Jx8BFt0kPw__L_DYZ_riU</recordid><startdate>20240501</startdate><enddate>20240501</enddate><creator>Okur, S.</creator><creator>Yanmaz, L.E.</creator><creator>Çınar, H.</creator><creator>Gölgeli, A.</creator><creator>Orhun, Ö.T.</creator><creator>Turgut, F.</creator><creator>Şenocak, M.G.</creator><creator>Arslan, T.</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>7S9</scope><scope>L.6</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2620-897X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20240501</creationdate><title>Comparison of first, second, and third versus the average of six probe-corneal touches for intraocular measurement of two rebound tonometers in healthy horses</title><author>Okur, S. ; Yanmaz, L.E. ; Çınar, H. ; Gölgeli, A. ; Orhun, Ö.T. ; Turgut, F. ; Şenocak, M.G. ; Arslan, T.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c340t-1315b584f08449319c7a21bcffa1f7f56981791a7134e812341752e48442f383</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Cornea</topic><topic>Horse</topic><topic>Intraocular pressure</topic><topic>measurement</topic><topic>Rebound</topic><topic>stallions</topic><topic>Tonometry</topic><topic>veterinary medicine</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Okur, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yanmaz, L.E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Çınar, H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gölgeli, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Orhun, Ö.T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Turgut, F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Şenocak, M.G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Arslan, T.</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>AGRICOLA</collection><collection>AGRICOLA - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of equine veterinary science</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Okur, S.</au><au>Yanmaz, L.E.</au><au>Çınar, H.</au><au>Gölgeli, A.</au><au>Orhun, Ö.T.</au><au>Turgut, F.</au><au>Şenocak, M.G.</au><au>Arslan, T.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of first, second, and third versus the average of six probe-corneal touches for intraocular measurement of two rebound tonometers in healthy horses</atitle><jtitle>Journal of equine veterinary science</jtitle><addtitle>J Equine Vet Sci</addtitle><date>2024-05-01</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>136</volume><spage>105074</spage><epage>105074</epage><pages>105074-105074</pages><artnum>105074</artnum><issn>0737-0806</issn><eissn>1542-7412</eissn><abstract>•Measuring intraocular pressure in horses can be challenging.•First probe-corneal touch measurements (PCT) had good agreement with the average.•89.5% and 78.9% first PCT were within 4 mmHg of the average of six PCT measurements. The aim of this study was to evaluate the intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements obtained from first, second, and third probe-cornea touch (PCT) and compare them with the average of six PCTs using two rebound tonometers in horses. This study enrolled a total of thirty-eight stallions, comprising of 24 Arabian horses and 14 cross-breeds (with an average age of 8 ± 3 years). The IOP measurements of first, second, and third, as well as the average of six PCTs were obtained using either Tonovet (TV) or Tonovet Plus (TV+) rebound tonometers. The mean differences (95% limits of agreement) between the average of six PCTs and the first, second, and third PCTs were 0.1 (-4.8 to 5), 0.2 (-4.8 to 4.5), and 0.2 (-3.6 to 4.0) mmHg with TV, respectively. With TV+, the differences were 0.3 (-6.6 to 7.2), 1.1 (-8.6 to 10.8), and -0.2 (-3.6 to 4.0) mmHg, respectively. Compared to the average of six PCTs, only 89.5%, 92.1%, and 97.4% of IOP measurements obtained from TV and 78.9%, 73.3%, and 65.8% of IOP measurements obtained from TV+ were within 4 mmHg of the average of six PCTs for first, second, and third PCTs, respectively. In conclusion, the measurement of IOP in the first PCT achieved best agreement with the IOP measurement of six average PCTs. Therefore, the first PCT could be considered as an alternative option for measuring IOP in horses when obtaining an average of six PCTs is not feasible.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>38648909</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.jevs.2024.105074</doi><tpages>1</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2620-897X</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0737-0806
ispartof Journal of equine veterinary science, 2024-05, Vol.136, p.105074-105074, Article 105074
issn 0737-0806
1542-7412
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3045116234
source Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals
subjects Cornea
Horse
Intraocular pressure
measurement
Rebound
stallions
Tonometry
veterinary medicine
title Comparison of first, second, and third versus the average of six probe-corneal touches for intraocular measurement of two rebound tonometers in healthy horses
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-27T21%3A06%3A53IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20first,%20second,%20and%20third%20versus%20the%20average%20of%20six%20probe-corneal%20touches%20for%20intraocular%20measurement%20of%20two%20rebound%20tonometers%20in%20healthy%20horses&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20equine%20veterinary%20science&rft.au=Okur,%20S.&rft.date=2024-05-01&rft.volume=136&rft.spage=105074&rft.epage=105074&rft.pages=105074-105074&rft.artnum=105074&rft.issn=0737-0806&rft.eissn=1542-7412&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jevs.2024.105074&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3153591492%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3045116234&rft_id=info:pmid/38648909&rft_els_id=S0737080624000807&rfr_iscdi=true