Abstract
Purpose :
To compare corneal intraocular pressure (IOP) of healthy individuals measured with Pneumotonometry and Ocular Response Analyzer.
Methods :
Subjects presenting with no active ocular disease were recruited for this randomized, single visit study to measure IOP at the central cornea during a 5-hour period at 2.5-hour intervals. Three consective measurements were performed with the pneumotonometer (Model 30TM, Reichert Technologies, Inc., Buffalo, New York) via applanation tonometry, and then four consectives measurements with the Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA, Reichert Technologies, Inc., Buffalo, New York) via noncontact tonometry at each time point. ORA reported two values for each IOP measurement: corneal-compensated IOP (IOPcc) and Goldmann-correlated IOP (IOPg).
Results :
Thirty subjects with mean (SD) age 28 (9.8) completed the study. The mean [Confidence Interval, 95% CI] pneumotonometry IOP, IOPcc, and IOPg were 17.12 [17.12, 17.75], 14.54 [14.17, 14.90], and 13.58 [13.15, 14.01] mmHg, respectively. The pneumotonometry IOP was 2.90 [2.61, 3.18] mmHg higher and 3.86 [3.53, 4.18] mmHg higher than IOPcc and IOPg, respectively (p-values <0.05). The spearman correlation between pneumotonometry IOP and ORA IOPcc was 0.639 (P <0.001) and between pneumotonometry IOP and ORA IOPg was 0.626 (P <0.0001).
Conclusions :
Pneumotonometry IOP values are significantly higher at the central cornea of healthy eyes compared with the Ocular Response Analyzer for 95% of the time points. The two instruments exhibit a strong positive correlation; therefore, pneumotonometry may be used in place of ORA on healthy subjects given a correction factor.
This abstract was presented at the 2023 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in New Orleans, LA, April 23-27, 2023.