advertisement
Abstract #10323 Published in IGR 6-1
Comparison of the Proview pressure phosphene tonometer performed by the patient and examiner with the Goldmann applanation tonometer
Danesh-Meyer HV; Niederer R; Gaskin BJ; Gamble GClinical and Experimental Ophthalmology 2004; 32: 29-32
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 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 subanalyzed 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 and ±14.9 mmHg 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.
Dr. H.V. Danesh-Meyer, Department of Ophthalmology, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand. h.daneshmeyer@auckland.ac.nz
Classification:
6.1 Intraocular pressure measurement; factors affecting IOP (Part of: 6 Clinical examination methods)
