Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2006 Jul;90(7):833-5.
doi: 10.1136/bjo.2005.089870. Epub 2006 May 3.

Comparison of rebound tonometry with Goldmann applanation tonometry and correlation with central corneal thickness

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Comparison of rebound tonometry with Goldmann applanation tonometry and correlation with central corneal thickness

M E Iliev et al. Br J Ophthalmol. 2006 Jul.

Abstract

Background/aims: Rebound tonometry (RT) is performed without anaesthesia with a hand held device. The primary aim was to compare RT with Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) and to correlate with central corneal thickness (CCT). The secondary aim was to prove tolerability and practicability of RT under "study conditions" and "routine practice conditions."

Methods: In group 1 (52 eyes/28 patients), all measurements were taken by the same physician, in the same room and order: non-contact optical pachymetry, RT, slit lamp inspection, GAT. Patients were questioned about discomfort or pain. In group 2 (49 eyes/27 patients), tonometry was performed by three other physicians during routine examinations.

Results: RT was well tolerated and safe. Intraocular pressure (IOP) ranged between 6 mm Hg and 48 mm Hg. No different trends were found between the groups. RT tended to give slightly higher readings: n = 101, mean difference 1.0 (SD 2.17) mm Hg; 84.1% of RT readings within plus or minus 3 mm Hg of GAT; 95% confidence interval in the Bland-Altman analysis -3.2 mm Hg to +5.2 mm Hg. Both RT and GAT showed a weak positive correlation with CCT (r2 0.028 and 0.025, respectively).

Conclusions: RT can be considered a reliable alternative for clinical screening and in cases where positioning of the head at the slit lamp is impossible or topical preparations are to be avoided.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interest: none.

References

    1. Goldmann H, Schmidt T H. Über Applanations‐tonometrie. Ophthalmologica 1957134221–242. - PubMed
    1. Kontiola A I. A new electromechanical method for measuring intraocular pressure. Doc Ophthalmol 199793265–276. - PubMed
    1. Kontiola A I. A new induction‐based impact method for measuring intraocular pressure. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 200078142–145. - PubMed
    1. Kontiola A I, Goldblum D, Mittag T.et al The induction/impact tonometer: a new instrument to measure intraocular pressure in the rat. Exp Eye Res 200173781–785. - PubMed
    1. Goldblum D, Kontiola A I, Mittag T.et al Non‐invasive determination of intraocular pressure in the rat eye. Comparison of an electronic tonometer (TonoPen), and a rebound (impact probe) tonometer. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2002240942–946. - PubMed