Comparison of the Proview pressure phosphene tonometer performed by the patient and examiner with the Goldmann applanation tonometer

Objective: To compare the results of Proview pressure phosphene tonometry (PPPT) performed by the patient and an examiner with Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT). Methods: A comparative case series of 96 (192 eyes) consecutive patients from a glaucoma clinic was conducted. Intraocular pressure (IO...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Clinical & experimental ophthalmology 2004-02, Vol.32 (1), p.29-32
Hauptverfasser: Danesh-Meyer, Helen V, Niederer, Rachel, Gaskin, Brent J, Gamble, Greg
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Objective: To compare the results of Proview pressure phosphene tonometry (PPPT) performed by the patient and an examiner with Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT). Methods: A comparative case series of 96 (192 eyes) consecutive patients from a glaucoma clinic was conducted. Intraocular pressure (IOP) was measured with GAT by one examiner, PPPT by another examiner, and PPPT by the patient. All examiners were masked to the results from any preceding IOP measurement. Results: The coefficient of repeatability for repeated measurements for the GAT was ±0.48 mmHg. The limits of agreement for self‐measurement of IOP with the PPPT and examiner measured IOP with PPPT were 6.3 mmHg and 4.8 mmHg, respectively. The limits of agreement between GAT and self assessed PPPT were ±11.8 mmHg (mean difference of 0.63 mmHg). When the same comparison was made between GAT and examiner assessed PPPT, the results were limits of agreement of ±10 mmHg (mean difference of 2.86 mmHg). No significant difference was identified in the agreement of the GAT and the PPPT when subanalysed for age of patient or diagnosis (P > 0.05). The limits of agreement between self‐assessed IOP with the PPPT and the GAT were ±8.2 for those with IOP 20 mmHg. Conclusions: Poor agreement exists between IOP measured by GAT and PPPT measured by an examiner or by the patient.
ISSN:1442-6404
1442-9071
DOI:10.1046/j.1442-9071.2004.00753.x