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
. 2015 Nov;160(5):937-943.e1.
doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2015.07.029. Epub 2015 Jul 23.

Comparison of Intraocular Pressure Measurements Obtained by Rebound, Noncontact, and Goldmann Applanation Tonometry in Children

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Comparison of Intraocular Pressure Measurements Obtained by Rebound, Noncontact, and Goldmann Applanation Tonometry in Children

Chi Shian Feng et al. Am J Ophthalmol. 2015 Nov.

Abstract

Purpose: To compare intraocular pressure (IOP) among rebound, noncontact, and Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) and their relationships to central corneal thickness in children.

Design: Diagnostic protocol comparison and evaluation.

Methods: In right eyes of 419 children, mean IOP, rates of successful measurement with 3 tonometries, and intermethod agreement by Bland-Altman plot were assessed. The influences of central corneal thickness, and of average IOP of 3 tonometries on IOP differences between tonometries, were evaluated.

Results: The mean age was 8.89 ± 3.41 years (3-15 years). There was significant difference in mean IOP of each tonometry; GAT showed the lowest values (P < .05). The IOP was successfully measured by noncontact tonometry in 89%, by rebound tonometry in 75%, and by GAT in 64% of children less than 10 years old, and in 100%, 98%, and 94% of children older than 10 years, respectively. The IOP of each tonometer positively correlated with central corneal thickness (P < .05). The mean differences and limits of agreement were 0.81 ± 6.19 mm Hg (noncontact minus rebound), 2.56 ± 4.62 mm Hg (rebound minus GAT), and 1.81 ± 4.76 mm Hg (noncontact minus GAT). Rebound and noncontact tonometry overestimated IOP relative to GAT for thicker central corneal thicknesses. Rebound tonometry overestimated IOP relative to GAT and noncontact tonometry at higher average IOP of 3 tonometries.

Conclusions: Rebound, noncontact, and Goldmann applanation tonometries can be considered appropriate methods for children, though noncontact tonometry is the most accessible. Given the risk of false-positive diagnosis of pediatric glaucoma, attention should be devoted to children with IOP within a suspicious range or thicker cornea.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources