Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of the quality score of intraocular pressure and ocular pulse amplitude values measured by the Pascal dynamic contour tonometer

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Ophthalmology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The Pascal dynamic contour tonometer (PDCT) is designed to measure intraocular pressure (IOP) largely independent of the corneal properties. It is equipped with a digital LCD screen that displays the IOP, the ocular pulse amplitude (OPA) and the quality score (Q) of the measurements [range 1 (excellent) to 5 (poor)]. The manufacturer has recommended discarding the IOP and OPA values of Q4 and Q5. The aim of our study was to assess if IOP and OPA measurements with Q3 are acceptable for clinical and research purposes. This is a prospective, observational study in which both patients with ocular hypertension or glaucoma and healthy subjects were enrolled; three consecutive PDCT IOP measurements were performed on all participants. Only patients and subjects with Q1, Q2 and Q3 recorded together were eligible. Only one eye per subject was considered for statistical analysis. The mean PDCT IOP and OPA were taken for statistical analyses. An ANOVA test for repeated measures was used to compare the differences between PDCT IOP and OPA Q1, Q2, and Q3 scores. A total of 87 subjects met the inclusion criteria. Mean PDCT (±SD) IOP were 17.5 ± 3.4 mmHg for Q1, 17.6 ± 3.3 mmHg for Q2 and 17.9 ± 3.3 mmHg for Q3 (P > 0.05). Mean OPA Q1, Q2 and Q3 were 2.5 ± 0.9, 2.5 ± 1.0 and 2.5 ± 1.0 mmHg, respectively, and were not statistically different. Based on these results, we concluded that the IOP and OPA values with Q1, Q2 or Q3 measured by PDCT are not significantly different and can therefore be taken into account indiscriminately for clinical and research purposes.

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.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Flammer J, Orgül S (1998) Optic nerve blood-flow abnormalities in glaucoma. Prog Retin Eye Res 17:267–289

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Flammer J, Orgül S, Costa VP, Orzalesi N, Krieglstein GK, Serra LM, Renard JP, Stefánsson E (2002) The impact of ocular blood flow in glaucoma. Prog Retin Eye Res 21:359–393

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Grieshaber MC, Flammer J (2005) Blood flow in glaucoma. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 16:79–83

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Hoffmann EM, Grus F-H, Pfeiffer N (2004) Intraocular pressure and ocular pulse amplitude using dynamic contour tonometry and contact lens tonometry. BMC Ophthalmol 4:1–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Schwenn O, Troost R, Vogel A, Grus F, Beck S, Pfeiffer N (2002) Ocular pulse amplitude in patients with open angle glaucoma, normal tension glaucoma and ocular hypertension. Br J Ophthalmol 86:981–984

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Williamson TH, Harris A (1996) Color Doppler ultrasound imaging of the eye and orbit. Surv Ophthalmol 40:255–267

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kanngiesser HE, Kniestedt C, Roberts YC (2005) Dynamic contour tonometry: presentation of a new tonometer. J Glaucoma 14:344–350

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kotecha A, White ET, Shewry JM, Garway-Heath DF (2005) The relative effects of corneal thickness and age on Goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry. Br J Ophthalmol 89:1572–1575

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Kaufmann C, Bachmann LM, Thiel MA (2004) Comparison of dynamic contour tonometry with Goldmann applanation tonometry. IOVS 45:3118–3121

    Google Scholar 

  10. Pourjavan S, Boëlle PY, Detry-Morel M, De Potter P (2007) Physiological diurnal variability and characteristics of the ocular pulse amplitude (OPA) with the dynamic contour tonometer (DCT-Pascal). Int Ophthalmol 27:357–360

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Vulsteke C, Satlmans I, Fieuw S, Zeyen T (2008). Correlation between ocular pulse amplitude measured by dynamic contour tonometer and visual field defects. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 246:559–565

    Google Scholar 

  12. Barreto J Jr, Babic M, Vessani MR, Susanna R Jr (2006) Dynamic contour tonometry and Goldman applanation tonometry in eyes with keratoconus. Clinics 61:511–514

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Pourjavan S, Deghislghe C, Van Maelderen , Zeyen T (2005) Pachymetry before or after applanation tonometry. Does it matter? Bull Soc Belge Ophthalmol 296:51–55

    Google Scholar 

  14. Lachkar Y (2006) I have tested for you. The contour tonometer. IOP analysis using “Dynamic Contour Tonometry”. J Fr Ophthalmol 29:32–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Medeiros FA, Sample PA, Weinreb RN (2007) Comparison of dynamic contour tonometry and Goldmann applanation tonometry in African American subjects. Ophthalmology 114:658–665

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Pache M, Wilmsmeyer S, Lautebach S, Funk J (2005) Dynamic contour tonometry versus Goldmann applanation tonometry: a comparative study. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 243:763–767

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Detry-Morel M, Jamart J, Detry MB, Ledoux A, Pourjavan S (2007) Clinical evaluation of the Pascal dynamic contour tonometer. J Fr Ophtalmol 30:260–270

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Herdener S, Pache M, Lautebach S, Funk J (2007) Dynamic contour tonometry (DCT) versus Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT)—a comparison of agreement and reproducibility. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 24:1027–1030

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Herdener S, Hafizovic D, Pache M, Lautebach S, Funk J (2008) Is the PASCAL-tonometer suitable for measuring intraocular pressure in clinical routine? Long- and short-term reproducibility of dynamic contour tonometry. Eur J Ophthalmol 18:39–43

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Georgopoulos GT, Diestelhorst M, Fisher R, Ruokonen P, Krieglstein GK (2002) The short-term effect of latanoprost on intraocular pressure and pulsatile ocular blood flow. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 80:54–58

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. St Luc University Hospital, Université Catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium

    S. Pourjavan, P. Boghossian & M. Detry-Morel

Authors
  1. S. Pourjavan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. P. Boghossian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. M. Detry-Morel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. Pourjavan.

Additional information

The authors had neither financial support nor personal financial interest in this study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pourjavan, S., Boghossian, P. & Detry-Morel, M. Comparison of the quality score of intraocular pressure and ocular pulse amplitude values measured by the Pascal dynamic contour tonometer. Int Ophthalmol 30, 1–5 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-008-9280-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-008-9280-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation