Abstract
Abstract: :
Purpose: To determine the agreement between the Proview Eye Pressure monitor and Goldmann tonometry, and the repeatability of home based Proview measurements. Methods: The sample consisted of 39 volunteers (29 treated POAG and 10 ocular hypertension) with mean age of 65.5 years (range 46-82yo). Each volunteer was instructed in the use of the Proview home pressure analyzer and had Goldmann tonometer readings taken by a doctor and Proview IOP measurements taken by the volunteer. Each reading was taken twice at baseline, separated by one hour. The volunteers took the Proview analyzer home and independently monitored their IOP three times per day for 10 days. Agreement between techniques and repeatability was analyzed using intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) and repeated measures ANOVA. Results: The range of IOP measured using Goldmann tonometry was from 10 to 28mmHg (mean 18.04 ±4.36). The mean of differences between repeated baseline measures was 0.03 with limits of agreement (95%) from -2.89 to 2.95. The range of IOP for Proview was 12 to 23mmHg (mean 16.98 ±2.80). The mean of differences between repeated baseline measures was 0.16 with limits of agreement (95%) from -3.76 to 4.08. The mean of differences between Goldmann and Proview was 1.06 with limits of agreement (95%) from -6.61 to 8.72. The concordance between Goldmann and Proview was moderate (ICC=0.47). The ICC for repeated home Proview recordings for the morning was 0.96 (ANOVA: p=0.92). Conclusions: Goldmann tonometry generally gave a higher IOP than Proview, and demonstrated better repeatability. Agreement between techniques was "moderate". However the repeatability of the Proview when used for 10 consecutive days at home, was "substantial" to "almost perfect".
Keywords: intraocular pressure