Cargando…

Comparison between dynamic contour tonometry and Goldmann applanation tonometry correcting equations

In order to investigate the reliability of correcting GAT formulas in comparison with dynamic contour tonometry (DCT), this study included 112 right eyes of 112 healthy subjects aged from 21 to 77 years, whose eyes underwent to a full ophthalmologic exam. IOP was measured in each eye with DCT and th...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: De Bernardo, Maddalena, Casaburi, Claudia, De Pascale, Ilaria, Capasso, Luigi, Cione, Ferdinando, Rosa, Nicola
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group UK 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9684577/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36418360
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-24318-y
_version_ 1784835318881452032
author De Bernardo, Maddalena
Casaburi, Claudia
De Pascale, Ilaria
Capasso, Luigi
Cione, Ferdinando
Rosa, Nicola
author_facet De Bernardo, Maddalena
Casaburi, Claudia
De Pascale, Ilaria
Capasso, Luigi
Cione, Ferdinando
Rosa, Nicola
author_sort De Bernardo, Maddalena
collection PubMed
description In order to investigate the reliability of correcting GAT formulas in comparison with dynamic contour tonometry (DCT), this study included 112 right eyes of 112 healthy subjects aged from 21 to 77 years, whose eyes underwent to a full ophthalmologic exam. IOP was measured in each eye with DCT and then with GAT. IOP values obtained with GAT were corrected with 10 equations and then compared with those provided by DCT. Participants mean age was 42.24 ± 14.08 years; mean IOP measured with DCT was 17.61 ± 2.87 and 15.50 ± 2.47 mmHg, measured with GAT. The mean discordance between DCT and GAT measurements was 2.11 ± 2.24 mmHg. All the correcting formulas, but Srodka one (p ˂ 0.001), tend to increase the difference between GAT and DCT. According to these results Śródka equation provides the best correction, reducing the difference between the two IOP measurement methods of − 0.03 ± 0.85 mmHg. Other equations do not provide a valid improvement of the agreement between the two methods or they provide a worsening of the agreement.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9684577
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Nature Publishing Group UK
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-96845772022-11-25 Comparison between dynamic contour tonometry and Goldmann applanation tonometry correcting equations De Bernardo, Maddalena Casaburi, Claudia De Pascale, Ilaria Capasso, Luigi Cione, Ferdinando Rosa, Nicola Sci Rep Article In order to investigate the reliability of correcting GAT formulas in comparison with dynamic contour tonometry (DCT), this study included 112 right eyes of 112 healthy subjects aged from 21 to 77 years, whose eyes underwent to a full ophthalmologic exam. IOP was measured in each eye with DCT and then with GAT. IOP values obtained with GAT were corrected with 10 equations and then compared with those provided by DCT. Participants mean age was 42.24 ± 14.08 years; mean IOP measured with DCT was 17.61 ± 2.87 and 15.50 ± 2.47 mmHg, measured with GAT. The mean discordance between DCT and GAT measurements was 2.11 ± 2.24 mmHg. All the correcting formulas, but Srodka one (p ˂ 0.001), tend to increase the difference between GAT and DCT. According to these results Śródka equation provides the best correction, reducing the difference between the two IOP measurement methods of − 0.03 ± 0.85 mmHg. Other equations do not provide a valid improvement of the agreement between the two methods or they provide a worsening of the agreement. Nature Publishing Group UK 2022-11-23 /pmc/articles/PMC9684577/ /pubmed/36418360 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-24318-y Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Article
De Bernardo, Maddalena
Casaburi, Claudia
De Pascale, Ilaria
Capasso, Luigi
Cione, Ferdinando
Rosa, Nicola
Comparison between dynamic contour tonometry and Goldmann applanation tonometry correcting equations
title Comparison between dynamic contour tonometry and Goldmann applanation tonometry correcting equations
title_full Comparison between dynamic contour tonometry and Goldmann applanation tonometry correcting equations
title_fullStr Comparison between dynamic contour tonometry and Goldmann applanation tonometry correcting equations
title_full_unstemmed Comparison between dynamic contour tonometry and Goldmann applanation tonometry correcting equations
title_short Comparison between dynamic contour tonometry and Goldmann applanation tonometry correcting equations
title_sort comparison between dynamic contour tonometry and goldmann applanation tonometry correcting equations
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9684577/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36418360
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-24318-y
work_keys_str_mv AT debernardomaddalena comparisonbetweendynamiccontourtonometryandgoldmannapplanationtonometrycorrectingequations
AT casaburiclaudia comparisonbetweendynamiccontourtonometryandgoldmannapplanationtonometrycorrectingequations
AT depascaleilaria comparisonbetweendynamiccontourtonometryandgoldmannapplanationtonometrycorrectingequations
AT capassoluigi comparisonbetweendynamiccontourtonometryandgoldmannapplanationtonometrycorrectingequations
AT cioneferdinando comparisonbetweendynamiccontourtonometryandgoldmannapplanationtonometrycorrectingequations
AT rosanicola comparisonbetweendynamiccontourtonometryandgoldmannapplanationtonometrycorrectingequations