Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Evaluation of the Icare-ONE rebound tonometer as a self-measuring intraocular pressure device in normal subjects

  • Glaucoma
  • Published:
Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To compare Icare ONE rebound self-tonometer (ICRBT) measurements with Goldman applanation tonometry (GAT).

Methods

A trained examiner instructed each of 60 normal subjects on use of the ICRBT. Each subject then took two measurements of his/her own pressure using the ICRBT. Finally, a different examiner, who was masked to the earlier readings, measured IOP by GAT. Bland–Altman limits of agreement (LOA), intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), Kappa values, and paired t-test were used to assess the agreement between the two methods. Pearson’s correlation coefficient was used for correlation analysis.

Results

All of the subjects were able to obtain correct measurements with ICRBT after three attempts. The mean intraocular pressure with ICRBT and GAT measurements were 16.0 ± 3.3 mmHg and 13.7 ± 2.5 mmHg respectively. The mean difference between patient’s ICRBT and technician’s GAT measurements was 2.3 mmHg (p < 0.001). In 63 % (38/60) of the cases the IOP difference (ICRBT − GAT) was within ± 3 mmHg. The weighted Kappa for the IOP measurements of the two methods was 0.49 (95% CI: 0.30–0.68, p < 0.001), indicating acceptable agreement. A significantly positive correlation was found between ICRBT IOP measurements and central corneal thickness (CCT) (r = 0.48, p < 0.001). In addition, the difference in IOP measurements (ICRBT − GAT) between the two methods was positively correlated with CCT (r = 0.31, p = 0.015), indicating that greater thickness is associated with greater differences between the two methods.

Conclusion

The ICRBT was reliable in the hands of normal subjects, and may be used for self-monitoring of IOP. ICRBT measurements generally overestimated GAT measurements.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Whitacre MM, Stein R (1993) Sources of error with use of Goldmann type tonometers. Surv Ophthalmol 38:1–30

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Whitacre MM, Stein RA, Hassanein K (1993) The effect of corneal thickness on applanation tonometry. Am J Ophthalmol 115:592–596

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. ElMallah MK, Asrani SG (2008) New ways to measure intraocular pressure. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 19:122–126

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Kontiola AI (2000) A new induction-based impact method for measuring intraocular pressure. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 78:142–145

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Danias J, Kontiola AI, Filippopoulos T, Mittag T (2003) Method for the noninvasive measurement of intraocular pressure in mice. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 44:1138–1141

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Cervino A (2006) Rebound tonometry: new opportunities and limitations of non-invasive determination of intraocular pressure. Br J Ophthalmol 90:1444–1446

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Martinez-de-la-Casa JM, Garcia-Feijoo J, Castillo A, Garcia Sanchez J (2005) Reproducibility and clinical evaluation of rebound tonometry. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 46:4578–4580

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Davies LN, Bartlett H, Mallen EA, Wolffsohn JS (2006) Clinical evaluation of rebound tonometer. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 84:206–209

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Nakamura M, Darhad U, Tatsumi Y, Fujioka M, Kusuhara A, Maeda H, Negi A (2006) Agreement of rebound tonometer in measuring intraocular pressure with three types of applanation tonometers. Am J Ophthalmol 142:332–334

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Brusini P, Salvetat ML, Zeppieri M, Tosoni C, Parisi L (2006) Comparison of ICare tonometer with Goldmann applanation tonometer in glaucoma patients. J Glaucoma 15:213–217

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Martinez-de-la-Casa JM, Garcia-Feijoo J, Vico E, Fernandez-Vidal A, Benitez del Castillo JM, Wasfi M, Garcia-Sanchez J (2006) Effect of corneal thickness on dynamic contour, rebound, and Goldmann tonometry. Ophthalmology 113:2156–2162

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Sahin A, Niyaz L, Yildirim N (2007) Comparison of the rebound tonometer with the Goldmann applanation tonometer in glaucoma patients. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol 35:335–339

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Ruokonen PC, Schwenteck T, Draeger J (2007) Evaluation of the impedance tonometer TGDc-01 and iCare according to the international ocular tonometer standards ISO 8612. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 245:1259–1265

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Munkwitz S, Elkarmouty A, Hoffmann EM, Pfeiffer N, Thieme H (2008) Comparison of the iCare rebound tonometer and the Goldmann applanation tonometer over a wide IOP range. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 246:875–879

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Chui WS, Lam A, Chen D, Chiu R (2008) The influence of corneal properties on rebound tonometry. Ophthalmology 115:80–84

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Jóhannesson G, Hallberg P, Eklund A, Lindén C (2008) Pascal, ICare and Goldmann applanation tonometry–a comparative study. Acta Ophthalmol 86:614–621

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Abraham LM, Epasinghe NC, Selva D, Casson R (2008) Comparison of the ICare reboundtonometer with the Goldmann applanation tonometer by experienced and inexperienced tonometrists. Eye 22:503–506

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Poostchi A, Mitchell R, Nicholas S, Purdie G, Wells A (2009) The iCare rebound tonometer: comparisons with Goldmann tonometry, and influence of central corneal thickness. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol 37:687–691

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Vandewalle E, Vandenbroeck S, Stalmans I, Zeyen T (2009) Comparison of ICare, dynamic contour tonometer, and ocular response analyzer with Goldmann applanation tonometer in patients with glaucoma. Eur J Ophthalmol 19:783–789

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Scuderi GL, Cascone NC, Regine F, Perdicchi A, Cerulli A, Recupero SM (2010) Validity and limits of the rebound tonometer (ICare®): clinical study. Eur J Ophthalmol 21:251–257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Asrani S, Chatterjee A, Wallace DK, Santiago-Turla C, Stinnett S (2011) Evaluation of the ICare rebound tonometer as a home intraocular pressure monitoring device. J Glaucoma 20:74–79

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. McGraw K, Wong S (1996) Forming Inferences about some intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychological Methods 1:30–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33:159–174

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Altman DG, Bland JM (1983) Measurement in medicine: the analysis of method comparison studies. Statistician 32:307–317

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Bagga H, Liu JH, Weinreb RN (2009) Intraocular pressure measurements throughout the 24 h. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 20:79–83

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Konstas AG, Topouzis F, Leliopoulou O, Pappas T, Georgiadis N, Jenkins JN, Stewart WC (2006) 24-hour intraocular pressure control with maximum medical therapy compared with surgery in patients with advanced open-angle glaucoma. Ophthalmology 113:761–765

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Liang SY, Lee GA, Shields D (2009) Self-tonometry in glaucoma management—past, present and future. Surv Ophthalmol 54:450–462

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Hughes E, Spry P, Diamond J (2003) 24-hour monitoring of intraocular pressure in glaucoma management: a retrospective review. J Glaucoma 12:232–236

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Tarkkanen A, Ulfves K, Ulfves T (2010) Self-tonometry in glaucoma. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 248:1679–1681

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Vasanthan Muttuvelu VD, Baggesen K, Ehlers N (2010) Precision and accuracy of the ICare tonometer - Peripheral and central IOP measurements by rebound tonometry. Acta Ophthalmol Sep 15 [Epub ahead of print]

  31. Balkrishnan R, Bond JB, Byerly WG, Camacho FT, Anderson RT (2003) Medication-related predictors of health-related quality of life in glaucoma patients enrolled in amedicare health maintenance organization. Am J Geriatr Pharmacother 1:75–81

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ioannis Halkiadakis.

Additional information

The authors have no proprietary interest in any aspect of this study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Halkiadakis, I., Stratos, A., Stergiopoulos, G. et al. Evaluation of the Icare-ONE rebound tonometer as a self-measuring intraocular pressure device in normal subjects. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 250, 1207–1211 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-011-1875-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-011-1875-6

Keywords

Navigation