Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Vergleich des iCare-Tonometers mit dem Goldmann-Tonometer in Malawi

Comparison of the iCare tonometer with the Goldmann tonometer in Malawi

  • Originalien
  • Published:
Der Ophthalmologe Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

Hintergrund

Das Risiko, an einem Glaukom zu erkranken, ist bei schwarzafrikanischen Patienten um das 4- bis 5-Fache erhöht. Einfache und effektive Augeninnendruckmessmethoden sind v. a. in Entwicklungsländern erforderlich.

Methoden

Es wurden 150 Augen von 150 Patienten mittels Pachymetrie gefolgt vom iCare-Tonometer (ICT) und dem Goldmann-Applanationstonometer (GAT) untersucht und bezüglich ihres IOD in 3 Gruppen eingeteilt: I: < 16 mmHg, II: 16–23 mmHg, III: > 23 mmHg, sowie mit der Bland-Altman-Methode verglichen. Die Abhängigkeit des ICT von der zentralen Hornhautdicke (ZHD) wurde ermittelt und eine Korrekturformel für das ICT bestimmt.

Ergebnisse

Die mittlere Differenz zwischen dem mit dem GAT und ICT gemessenen IOD betrug 0,84 ± 2,63 mmHg, allerdings waren die Abweichungen in Gruppe III höher als in Gruppe I und II. Die mittlere ZHD betrug 513,51 ± 36,22 µm.

Schlussfolgerungen

Die Übereinstimmung zwischen GAT und ICT war bei niedrigen IOD-Werten gut. In höheren IOD-Bereichen war das ICT etwas ungenauer. Der Einsatz des ICT in Entwicklungsländern ist gut möglich. Im Vergleich zu Untersuchungen aus anderen Ländern wiesen malawische Patienten die niedrigste ZHD weltweit auf.

Abstract

Background

The risk for glaucoma is 4–5 times higher in patients from sub-Saharan Africa. Thus, especially in developing countries an easy and effective method for assessing the intraocular pressure (IOP) is needed.

Methodology

In this hospital-based survey 150 eyes were divided into 3 groups concerning the IOP (group I < 16 mmHg, group II 16–23 mmHg and group III > 23 mmHg) and underwent examination with ultrasound pachymetry followed by iCare tonometry (ICT) and Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT). Agreement of the measurements by two tonometers was assessed with the Bland-Altman method and the influence of the central corneal thickness (CCT) on the ICT measurements was determined.

Results

The mean difference between the IOD measured with GAT and ICT was 0.84 ± 2.63 mmHg. The differences were similar in all three groups (0.77–0.97 mmHg), however, the standard deviation in group III (4.04 mmHg) was greater than in groups I (1.98 mmHg) and II (1.79 mmHg). The mean CCT was 513.51 ± 36.22 µm.

Conclusions

The agreement of measurements by GAT and ICT was good for lower IOP values but less accurate in patients with higher IOP values (group III). A dependency of the CCT on the ICT measurements was observed. In comparison to other countries the lowest CCTs were found in Malawian patients.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Abb. 1
Abb. 2
Abb. 3
Abb. 4

Literatur

  1. Aghaian E, Choe JE, Lin S et al (2004) Central corneal thickness of Caucasians, Chinese, Hispanics, Filipinos, African Americans, and Japanese in a glaucoma clinic. Ophthalmology 111:2211–2219

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Brusini P, Salvetat ML, Zeppieri M et al (2006) Comparison of ICare tonometer with Goldmann applanation tonometer in glaucoma patients. J Glaucoma 15:213–217

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Chui WS, Lam A, Chen D et al (2008) The influence of corneal properties on rebound tonometry. Ophthalmology 115:80–84

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Davies LN, Bartlett H, Mallen EA et al (2006) Clinical evaluation of rebound tonometer. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 84:206–209

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Gunvant P, O’leary DJ, Baskaran M et al (2005) Evaluation of tonometric correction factors. J Glaucoma 14:337–343

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Halkiadakis I, Stratos A, Stergiopoulos G et al (2012) Evaluation of the Icare-ONE rebound tonometer as a self-measuring intraocular pressure device in normal subjects. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol

  7. Johannesson G, Hallberg P, Eklund A et al (2008) Pascal, ICare and Goldmann applanation tonometry – a comparative study. Acta Ophthalmol 86:614–621

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kniestedt C, Lin S, Choe J et al (2006) Correlation between intraocular pressure, central corneal thickness, stage of glaucoma, and demographic patient data: prospective analysis of biophysical parameters in tertiary glaucoma practice populations. J Glaucoma 15:91–97

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Kohlhaas M, Boehm AG, Spoerl E et al (2006) Effect of central corneal thickness, corneal curvature, and axial length on applanation tonometry. Arch Ophthalmol 124:471–476

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Kontiola A (2000) A new induction-based impact method for measuring intraocular pressure. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 78

  11. Kontiola Ai GD, Mittag T, Danias J (2001) The induction/impact tonometer: a new instrument to measure intraocular pressure in the rat. Exp Eye Res 73:781–785

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. La Rosa FA, Gross RL, Orengo-Nania S (2001) Central corneal thickness of Caucasians and African Americans in glaucomatous and nonglaucomatous populations. Arch Ophthalmol 119:23–27

    Google Scholar 

  13. Martinez-De-La-Casa JM, Garcia-Feijoo J, Vico E et al (2006) Effect of corneal thickness on dynamic contour, rebound, and goldmann tonometry. Ophthalmology 113:2156–2162

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Munkwitz S, Elkarmouty A, Hoffmann EM et al (2008) Comparison of the iCare rebound tonometer and the Goldmann applanation tonometer over a wide IOP range. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 246:875–879

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Poostchi A, Mitchell R, Nicholas S et al (2009) The iCare rebound tonometer: comparisons with Goldmann tonometry, and influence of central corneal thickness. Clin Exp Ophthalmol 37:687–691

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Quigley Ha BT (2006) The number of people with glaucoma worldwide in 2010 and 2020. Br J Ophthalmol 90:262–267

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Sahin A, Basmak H, Niyaz L et al (2007) Reproducibility and tolerability of the ICare rebound tonometer in school children. J Glaucoma 16:185–188

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Sahin A, Niyaz L, Yildirim N (2007) Comparison of the rebound tonometer with the Goldmann applanation tonometer in glaucoma patients. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol 35:335–339

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Schreiber W, Vorwerk CK, Langenbucher A et al (2007) Evaluierung der Reboundtonometrie (iCare) im Vergleich zum TonopenXL und dem Goldmann-Applanationstonometer. Ophthalmologe 104:299–304

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Scuderi GL, Cascone NC, Regine F et al (2011) Validity and limits of the rebound tonometer (ICare®): clinical study. Eur J Ophthalmol 21:251–257

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Semes L, Shaikh A, Mcgwin G et al (2006) The relationship among race, iris color, central corneal thickness, and intraocular pressure. Optom Vis Sci 83:512–515

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Shimmyo M, Ross AJ, Moy A et al (2003) Intraocular pressure, Goldmann applanation tension, corneal thickness, and corneal curvature in Caucasians, Asians, Hispanics, and African Americans. Am J Ophthalmol 136:603–613

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Wolfs RC, Klaver CC, Vingerling JR et al (1997) Distribution of central corneal thickness and its association with intraocular pressure: the Rotterdam Study. Am J Ophthalmol 123:767–772

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Interessenkonflikt

Der korrespondierende Autor gibt für sich und seine Koautoren an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Universitäts-Augenklinik Tübingen, Tübingen, Deutschland

    J. Hohmann, M. Schulze-Schwering, D. Doycheva & M.S. Spitzer

  2. College of Medicine, University of Malawi, Ophthalmology, Blantyre, Malawi

    J. Hohmann, M. Schulze-Schwering, T. Chirambo Nyaka, V. Moyo, P.C. Kayange, N.H. Batumba & M.S. Spitzer

  3. Augenklinik Universitätsallee, Parkallee 301, 28213, Bremen, Deutschland

    J. Hohmann

Authors
  1. J. Hohmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. Schulze-Schwering
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. T. Chirambo Nyaka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. V. Moyo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. P.C. Kayange
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. D. Doycheva
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. N.H. Batumba
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. M.S. Spitzer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J. Hohmann.

Additional information

__ ____

Dieses Manuskript basiert auf einem Vortrag, gehalten auf dem Kongress der Deutschen Ophthalmologischen Gesellschaft 2011.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hohmann, J., Schulze-Schwering, M., Chirambo Nyaka, T. et al. Vergleich des iCare-Tonometers mit dem Goldmann-Tonometer in Malawi. Ophthalmologe 109, 1098–1102 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00347-012-2599-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00347-012-2599-7

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Search

Navigation