DOI: https://doi.org/10.14710/dmj.v14i5.47796

COMPARISON OF IOP MEASUREMENT BY GOLDMANN APPLANATION TONOMETER AND NON CONTACT TONOMETER IN GLAUCOMA PATIENTS

*Puspita Kusuma Dewi  -  Ophthalmology Department, Diponegoro National Hospital, Indonesia
Maharani Maharani  -  Ophthalmology Department, Faculty of Medicine, Diponegoro University, Semarang, Indonesia, Indonesia
Open Access Copyright 2025 Puspita Kusuma Dewi, Maharani Maharani
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Citation Format:
Abstract

Introduction and objective: Intraocular pressure (IOP) measurement is important in diagnosis and management of glaucoma. Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT) is regarded as the ’’gold standard’’ for measuring IOP. The non-contact tonometer (NCT) commonly used in ophthalmological practices and has potential advantages as the minimum risk of infection. This study was undertaken to compare IOP measured by GAT and NCT in different range of IOP. Methods: This was a cross sectional, observational analytic study wherein glaucoma patients visiting a hospital were included. IOP measurements were performed using GAT and NCT. Subjects were grouped into lower (<21 mmHg) IOP and higher (≥ 21 mmHg) IOP. The tonometer inter-method for IOP values were compared and analyzed. Results: IOP of 82 glaucomatous eyes were measured (46 eyes in the lower IOP group and 36 eyes in the higher IOP group). The mean of paired difference between GAT and NCT in the lower IOP group was 0.22±2.5 mmHg (p>0.05) and in the higher IOP group was 1.68±4.1 mmHg (p<0.05). The NCT underestimated GAT measurement in 67% eyes in higher IOP level group. Bland-Altman plot showed a good NCT-GAT agreement in the lower IOP group. Conclusion: Pressure readings of GAT and NCT was comparable in the subjects with lower IOP range

 

Fulltext View|Download
Keywords: Intra ocular pressure, Goldmann applanation tonometer, Non-contact tonometer, glaucoma

Article Metrics:

Article Info
Section: Original Articles
Language : EN
Recent articles
PROPOSED MECHANISM OF ERLOTINIB-INDUCED RASH FORMATION IN RATS BASED ON THE SKIN EXPRESSION OF CINC1 AND TTP mRNAs DIFFERENTIATING APPENDICITIS TYPES: THE ROLE OF NEUTROPHIL SUBTYPES FACTORS INFLUENCING TREATMENT OUTCOMES OF DRUG-SENSITIVE TUBERCULOSIS PATIENTS: STUDY IN R.A. KARTINI HOSPITAL, JEPARA, INDONESIA CHEMOTHERAPY-INDUCED THROMBOCYTOPENIA LEADING TO LIFE-THREATENING HYPOVOLEMIC SHOCK IN CERVICAL CANCER: A CASE REPORT PROGRESSION OF CHRONIC LYMPHOCYTIC LEUKEMIA TO PROLYMPHOCYTIC LEUKEMIA: A RARE CASE REPORT More recent articles
  1. REFERENCES
  2. Tonnu PA, Ho T, Sharma K, White E, Bunce C, Heath DG. A comparison of four methods of tonometry: method agreement and interobserver variability.Br J Ophthalmol. 2005;89:847–850
  3. Pronin S, Brown L, Megaw R. Measurement of intraocular pressure by patients with glaucoma. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2017;135(10):1030-1036
  4. Chakrabarty L. Goldmann applanation tonometry versus non-contact tonometry: a comparative study. Int J Res Med Sci. 2016 Nov;4(11):4683-4687
  5. Onochie C, Okoye O, Ogunro A, Aribaba T, Hassan K, Onakoya A. Comparisons of the tono-pen and goldmann applanation tonometer in the measurement of intraocular pressure of primary open angle glaucoma patients in a hospital population in southwest Nigeria. Med Princ Pract 2016;25:566–571
  6. Mohan S, Tiwari S, Jain A, Gupta J, Sachan SK. Clinical comparison of pulsair non-contact tonometer and goldmann applanation tonometer in Indian population. Journal of Optometry (2014) 7, 86---90
  7. Cervino A. Rebound tonometry: new opportunities and limitations of non-invasive determination of intraocular pressure. Bjophthalmol. 2016 1444-6
  8. Termuhlen J. Rebound tonometry device readings correlate with GAT, with limitations. J glaucoma. 2016
  9. Kouchaki B, Hashemi H, Yekta A, Khabazkhoob. Comparison of current tonometry techniques in measurement of intraocular pressure. Journal of current ophthalmology 29 (2017) 92-7
  10. Vernon SA. Reproducibility with the Keeler Pulsair 2000 noncontact tonometer. Br J Ophthalmol. 1995;79:554---557
  11. Galgauskas S, Strupaite R, Strelkauskaite S, Asoklis R. Comparison of intraocular pressure measurements with different contact tonometers in young healthy persons. Int J Ophthalmol. 2016; 9, 76-80
  12. Tonnu PA, Ho T, Newson T, El Sheikh A, Sharma K, White E, et al . The influence of central corneal thickness and age on intraocular pressure measures by pneumotonometry, non-contact tonometry, the Tono PenXL and Goldmann applanation tonometry. Br J Ophthalmol. 2005;89:851-4
  13. Lawson-Kopp W, DeJong A, Yudcovitch L, Williams S, Kohl P, Yolton RL. Clinical evaluation of the Keeler Pulsair 3000 noncontact tonometer. Optometry. 2002;73:81---90

Last update:

No citation recorded.

Last update:

No citation recorded.