dc.contributor.author | Demirci, Göktuğ | |
dc.contributor.author | Erdur Karaman, Sevil | |
dc.contributor.author | Tanrıverdi, Cafer | |
dc.contributor.author | Gülkılık, İbrahim Gökhan | |
dc.contributor.author | Özsütçü, Mustafa | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2019-12-25T07:37:09Z | |
dc.date.available | 2019-12-25T07:37:09Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2019 | en_US |
dc.identifier.citation | Demirci, G., Erdur Karaman, S., Tanrıverdi, C., Gülkılık, İ. G. ve Özsütçü, M. (2019). Comparison of rebound tonometry and non-contact airpuff tonometry to Goldmann applanation tonometry. Therapeutic Advances in Ophthalmology, 11. http://doi.org/10.1177/2515841419835731 | en_US |
dc.identifier.uri | http://doi.org/10.1177/2515841419835731 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12511/4669 | |
dc.description.abstract | Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare the intraocular pressure measurements obtained from healthy subjects with the rebound tonometry, non-contact airpuff tonometry, and Goldmann applanation tonometry in different age groups. Methods: A total of 180 eyes of 90 healthy subjects were included in the study. According to the subjects' ages, the eyes were categorized into three groups: group 1 (age: 7-17 years), group 2 (age: 18-40 years), and group 3 (age: 41-75 years). Intraocular pressure was measured on each subject always in the same order: rebound tonometry, non-contact airpuff tonometry, and Goldmann applanation tonometry. Central corneal thickness values were obtained using ultrasonic pachymetry. One-way repeated-measures analysis of variance, Pearson's correlation coefficient, and Bland-Altman analysis were used for the statistical assessment. Results: The mean corneal thickness was found to be 604 +/- 13 mu m, 546 +/- 15 mu m, and 547 +/- 15 mu m in group 1, group 2, and group 3, respectively. Non-contact airpuff tonometry was significantly higher than both Goldmann applanation tonometry and rebound tonometry measurements in all groups (p < 0.001, for all). No statistical difference between Goldmann applanation tonometry and rebound tonometry measurements was found in group 1 (p = 0.248), group 2 (p = 0.63), and group 3 (p = 0.126). There was a significant positive correlation in the meaning of intraocular pressure measurements between rebound tonometry and non-contact airpuff tonometry; non-contact airpuff tonometry and Goldmann applanation tonometry; and Goldmann applanation tonometry and rebound tonometry in all groups. Conclusion: As a result, without need for topical anesthesia, fast measurement and ease-of-use rebound tonometry is a reliable alternative to Goldmann applanation tonometry in different age groups. | en_US |
dc.language.iso | eng | en_US |
dc.publisher | SAGE Publications Ltd. | en_US |
dc.rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess | en_US |
dc.rights | Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International | * |
dc.rights.uri | https://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ | * |
dc.subject | Central Corneal Thickness | en_US |
dc.subject | Glaucoma | en_US |
dc.subject | ldmanGon Applanation | en_US |
dc.subject | I-Care Tonometry | en_US |
dc.subject | Rebound Tonometry | en_US |
dc.title | Comparison of rebound tonometry and non-contact airpuff tonometry to Goldmann applanation tonometry | en_US |
dc.type | article | en_US |
dc.relation.ispartof | Therapeutic Advances in Ophthalmology | en_US |
dc.department | İstanbul Medipol Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Cerrahi Tıp Bilimleri Bölümü, Göz Hastalıkları Ana Bilim Dalı | en_US |
dc.authorid | 0000-0002-5079-4713 | en_US |
dc.authorid | 0000-0001-9829-7268 | en_US |
dc.authorid | 0000-0003-2445-6339 | en_US |
dc.authorid | 0000-0001-8954-5055 | en_US |
dc.identifier.volume | 11 | en_US |
dc.identifier.startpage | 1 | en_US |
dc.identifier.endpage | 7 | en_US |
dc.relation.publicationcategory | Makale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanı | en_US |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1177/2515841419835731 | en_US |