Cookies on this website
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Continue' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the agreement of tonometers available for clinical practice with the Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT), the most commonly accepted reference device. DESIGN: A systematic review and meta-analysis of directly comparative studies assessing the agreement of 1 or more tonometers with the reference tonometer (GAT). PARTICIPANTS: A total of 11 582 participants (15 525 eyes) were included. METHODS: Summary 95% limits of agreement (LoA) were produced for each comparison. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Agreement, recordability, and reliability. RESULTS: A total of 102 studies, including 130 paired comparisons, were included, representing 8 tonometers: dynamic contour tonometer, noncontact tonometer (NCT), ocular response analyzer, Ocuton S, handheld applanation tonometer (HAT), rebound tonometer, transpalpebral tonometer, and Tono-Pen. The agreement (95% limits) seemed to vary across tonometers: 0.2 mmHg (-3.8 to 4.3 mmHg) for the NCT to 2.7 mmHg (-4.1 to 9.6 mmHg) for the Ocuton S. The estimated proportion within 2 mmHg of the GAT ranged from 33% (Ocuton S) to 66% and 59% (NCT and HAT, respectively). Substantial inter- and intraobserver variability were observed for all tonometers. CONCLUSIONS: The NCT and HAT seem to achieve a measurement closest to the GAT. However, there was substantial variability in measurements both within and between studies.

Original publication

DOI

10.1016/j.ophtha.2012.02.030

Type

Journal article

Journal

Ophthalmology

Publication Date

08/2012

Volume

119

Pages

1552 - 1557

Keywords

Cross-Sectional Studies, Humans, Intraocular Pressure, Observer Variation, Predictive Value of Tests, Reproducibility of Results, Sensitivity and Specificity, Tonometry, Ocular