Background: A recently developed digital tonometer for transpalpebral intraocu lar pressure (IOP) measurement, distributed by Corneal, Inc., allows the noninva sive measurement of IOP for screening purposes. Method: W...Background: A recently developed digital tonometer for transpalpebral intraocu lar pressure (IOP) measurement, distributed by Corneal, Inc., allows the noninva sive measurement of IOP for screening purposes. Method: We measured the IOP of 2 18 eyes in 109 patients of the Interdisciplinary Uveitis Center of the Universit y of Heidelberg with intact corneal epithelium. IOPs were measured first with th e TGDc-01 tonometer, and then by means of Goldmann tonometry. IOPs were recorde d by two independent examiners. The mean of three measurements obtained with the TGDc-01 was taken, whereas only one measurement was performed with the Goldman n tonometer. Results: The mean difference between the TGDc-01 and Goldmann measurementswas 3.7 mmHg. The standard deviation of the differences was ±4.06 mmHg. Thus measu rements acquired with the TGDc-01 may range 4.4 mmHg above or 11.8 mmHg below t he values given by Goldmann tonometry. Conclusion: The IOP values obtained with the TGDc-01 were in poor agreement with Goldmann tonometry. We found a higher v ariation as well as a bias towards lower IOP values with the TGDc-01. It is a q uestion of clinical judgement as to how far these deviating measurements can be accepted for screening purposes. Because the IOPs obtained with the TGDc-01 are generally lower and less accurate than those obtained with the Goldmann tonomet er we believe that the TGDc-01 is not a reliable tool for IOP measurement in cl inical routine.展开更多
文摘Background: A recently developed digital tonometer for transpalpebral intraocu lar pressure (IOP) measurement, distributed by Corneal, Inc., allows the noninva sive measurement of IOP for screening purposes. Method: We measured the IOP of 2 18 eyes in 109 patients of the Interdisciplinary Uveitis Center of the Universit y of Heidelberg with intact corneal epithelium. IOPs were measured first with th e TGDc-01 tonometer, and then by means of Goldmann tonometry. IOPs were recorde d by two independent examiners. The mean of three measurements obtained with the TGDc-01 was taken, whereas only one measurement was performed with the Goldman n tonometer. Results: The mean difference between the TGDc-01 and Goldmann measurementswas 3.7 mmHg. The standard deviation of the differences was ±4.06 mmHg. Thus measu rements acquired with the TGDc-01 may range 4.4 mmHg above or 11.8 mmHg below t he values given by Goldmann tonometry. Conclusion: The IOP values obtained with the TGDc-01 were in poor agreement with Goldmann tonometry. We found a higher v ariation as well as a bias towards lower IOP values with the TGDc-01. It is a q uestion of clinical judgement as to how far these deviating measurements can be accepted for screening purposes. Because the IOPs obtained with the TGDc-01 are generally lower and less accurate than those obtained with the Goldmann tonomet er we believe that the TGDc-01 is not a reliable tool for IOP measurement in cl inical routine.
