Back to Journals » Clinical Ophthalmology » Volume 5

Central and peripheral intraocular pressure measured by a rebound tonometer

Authors Yamashita T, Miki A, Ieki Y, Kiryu J, Yaoeda, Shirakashi M

Published 10 August 2011 Volume 2011:5 Pages 1113—1118


Review by Single anonymous peer review

Peer reviewer comments 2

Tsutomu Yamashita1, Atsushi Miki1,2,3, Yoshiaki Ieki2, Junichi Kiryu2, Kiyoshi Yaoeda3,4, Motohiro Shirakashi3,5
1Department of Sensory Science, Faculty of Health Science and Technology, Kawasaki University of Medical Welfare, 2Department of Ophthalmology, Kawasaki Medical School, Kurashiki, Okayama, Japan; 3Division of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Niigata University Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, Niigata, Japan; 4Yaoeda Eye Clinic, Nagaoka, Japan; 5Kido Eye Clinic, Niigata, Japan

Purpose: We investigated at which corneal region the intraocular pressure as measured by the Icare® rebound tonometer (Finland Oy, Espoo, Finland) (hereinafter referred to as IC) was closest to the intraocular pressure as measured by the Goldmann applanation tonometer (hereinafter referred to as GT). We also investigated which parameters would be best for preparing the most suitable model for predicting GT.
Methods: A total of 102 normal eyes in 102 subjects were enrolled. IC measurements were carried out at the central, superior, inferior, temporal, and nasal regions of the cornea (ICC, ICS, ICI, ICT, and ICN, respectively), followed by GT calculations. Differences between GT and IC were analyzed using the Bland–Altman method. Stepwise multiple regression analysis was performed using GT as the objective variable, and age, laterality of eye, spherical equivalent refractive error, corneal radius, axial length, central corneal thickness, GT, ICC, ICS, ICI, ICT, and ICN as the explanatory variables.
Results: IC was higher than GT at all of the corneal regions, but the region with the least bias was ICC, followed by ICT. In the multiple regression analysis, the following prediction formula was calculated: GT = (0.445 × ICC) + (0.198 × ICN) + 3.022. When ICC was excluded from the explanatory variables, ICT had the highest partial correlation coefficient with GT.
Conclusion: ICC was closest to GT, but GT could be explained better by adding ICN to the prediction model. Moreover, in instances where ICC cannot be calculated or where reliability is clearly poor due to abnormal ocular rigidity, ICT was the closest to GT measured in the central corneal region.

Keywords: IOP, Icare, Goldmann applanation tonometer, ocular rigidity

Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.