Cargando…

Goldmann tonometer error correcting prism: clinical evaluation

PURPOSE: Clinically evaluate a modified applanating surface Goldmann tonometer prism designed to substantially negate errors due to patient variability in biomechanics. METHODS: A modified Goldmann prism with a correcting applanation tonometry surface (CATS) was mathematically optimized to minimize...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: McCafferty, Sean, Lim, Garrett, Duncan, William, Enikov, Eniko T, Schwiegerling, Jim, Levine, Jason, Kew, Corin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5422537/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28496302
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S135272
_version_ 1783234801243783168
author McCafferty, Sean
Lim, Garrett
Duncan, William
Enikov, Eniko T
Schwiegerling, Jim
Levine, Jason
Kew, Corin
author_facet McCafferty, Sean
Lim, Garrett
Duncan, William
Enikov, Eniko T
Schwiegerling, Jim
Levine, Jason
Kew, Corin
author_sort McCafferty, Sean
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: Clinically evaluate a modified applanating surface Goldmann tonometer prism designed to substantially negate errors due to patient variability in biomechanics. METHODS: A modified Goldmann prism with a correcting applanation tonometry surface (CATS) was mathematically optimized to minimize the intraocular pressure (IOP) measurement error due to patient variability in corneal thickness, stiffness, curvature, and tear film adhesion force. A comparative clinical study of 109 eyes measured IOP with CATS and Goldmann prisms. The IOP measurement differences between the CATS and Goldmann prisms were correlated to corneal thickness, hysteresis, and curvature. RESULTS: The CATS tonometer prism in correcting for Goldmann central corneal thickness (CCT) error demonstrated a reduction to <±2 mmHg in 97% of a standard CCT population. This compares to only 54% with CCT error <±2 mmHg using the Goldmann prism. Equal reductions of ~50% in errors due to corneal rigidity and curvature were also demonstrated. CONCLUSION: The results validate the CATS prism’s improved accuracy and expected reduced sensitivity to Goldmann errors without IOP bias as predicted by mathematical modeling. The CATS replacement for the Goldmann prism does not change Goldmann measurement technique or interpretation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5422537
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Dove Medical Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-54225372017-05-11 Goldmann tonometer error correcting prism: clinical evaluation McCafferty, Sean Lim, Garrett Duncan, William Enikov, Eniko T Schwiegerling, Jim Levine, Jason Kew, Corin Clin Ophthalmol Original Research PURPOSE: Clinically evaluate a modified applanating surface Goldmann tonometer prism designed to substantially negate errors due to patient variability in biomechanics. METHODS: A modified Goldmann prism with a correcting applanation tonometry surface (CATS) was mathematically optimized to minimize the intraocular pressure (IOP) measurement error due to patient variability in corneal thickness, stiffness, curvature, and tear film adhesion force. A comparative clinical study of 109 eyes measured IOP with CATS and Goldmann prisms. The IOP measurement differences between the CATS and Goldmann prisms were correlated to corneal thickness, hysteresis, and curvature. RESULTS: The CATS tonometer prism in correcting for Goldmann central corneal thickness (CCT) error demonstrated a reduction to <±2 mmHg in 97% of a standard CCT population. This compares to only 54% with CCT error <±2 mmHg using the Goldmann prism. Equal reductions of ~50% in errors due to corneal rigidity and curvature were also demonstrated. CONCLUSION: The results validate the CATS prism’s improved accuracy and expected reduced sensitivity to Goldmann errors without IOP bias as predicted by mathematical modeling. The CATS replacement for the Goldmann prism does not change Goldmann measurement technique or interpretation. Dove Medical Press 2017-05-03 /pmc/articles/PMC5422537/ /pubmed/28496302 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S135272 Text en © 2017 McCafferty et al. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed.
spellingShingle Original Research
McCafferty, Sean
Lim, Garrett
Duncan, William
Enikov, Eniko T
Schwiegerling, Jim
Levine, Jason
Kew, Corin
Goldmann tonometer error correcting prism: clinical evaluation
title Goldmann tonometer error correcting prism: clinical evaluation
title_full Goldmann tonometer error correcting prism: clinical evaluation
title_fullStr Goldmann tonometer error correcting prism: clinical evaluation
title_full_unstemmed Goldmann tonometer error correcting prism: clinical evaluation
title_short Goldmann tonometer error correcting prism: clinical evaluation
title_sort goldmann tonometer error correcting prism: clinical evaluation
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5422537/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28496302
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S135272
work_keys_str_mv AT mccaffertysean goldmanntonometererrorcorrectingprismclinicalevaluation
AT limgarrett goldmanntonometererrorcorrectingprismclinicalevaluation
AT duncanwilliam goldmanntonometererrorcorrectingprismclinicalevaluation
AT enikovenikot goldmanntonometererrorcorrectingprismclinicalevaluation
AT schwiegerlingjim goldmanntonometererrorcorrectingprismclinicalevaluation
AT levinejason goldmanntonometererrorcorrectingprismclinicalevaluation
AT kewcorin goldmanntonometererrorcorrectingprismclinicalevaluation