advertisement
Abstract #15069 Published in IGR 8-4
Comparison of Proview phosphene tonometry with Goldmann applanation tonometry
Morledge-Hampton SJ; Kwon RO; Krishna R; DeBry PW; Willoughby TLCanadian Journal of Ophthalmology 2006; 41: 722-726
BACKGROUND: To compare intraocular pressures obtained using a handheld pressure phosphene tonometer (PPT) (Proview, Bausch & Lomb Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Tampa, Fla.) with Goldmann applanation tonometry. METHODS: Comparative case series of 30 randomly selected patients. RESULTS: The readings obtained with the pressure phosphene tonometer display a higher mean and a larger standard deviation than those obtained with the Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT). Differences between PPT and GAT readings tended to decrease as a function of increased Goldmann levels. The relation of Proview and Goldmann readings (r = 0.32) and the scatterplot were not consistent with the hypothesis that the two methods are equivalent. INTERPRETATION: Our results indicate that the pressure phosphene-type handheld tonometry method, which does not appear to provide an accurate and consistent measure of intraocular pressure, is substantially less reliable than the Goldmann method.
Dr. R. Krishna, University of Missouri-Kansas City, Department of Ophthalmology, Eye Foundation, 2300 Holmes St., Kansas City, MO 64108, USA
Classification:
6.1 Intraocular pressure measurement; factors affecting IOP (Part of: 6 Clinical examination methods)
