Publisher: International Ophthalmology, 2017

Authors: Yoshitake Kato, Shunsuke Nakakura, Naoko Matsuo, Kayo Yoshitomi, Marina Handa, Hitoshi Tabuchi, Yoshiaki Kiuchi

Agreement Among Goldmann Applanation Tonometer, iCare, and iCare PRO Rebound Tonometers; Non-Contact Tonometer; and Tonopen XL in Healthy Elderly Subjects


Purpose: To evaluate the inter-device agreement among the Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT), iCare and Icare PRO rebound tonometers, non-contact tonometer (NCT), and Tonopen XL tonometer.

Methods: Sixty healthy elderly subjects were enrolled. The intraocular pressure (IOP) in each subject’s right eye was measured thrice using each of the five tonometers. Intra-device agreement was evaluated by calculating intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Inter-device agreement was evaluated by ICC and Bland–Altman analyses.

Results: ICCs for intra-device agreement for each tonometer were >0.8. IOP as measured by iCare (mean ± SD, 11.6 ± 2.5 mmHg) was significantly lower (p < 0.05) than that measured by GAT (14.0 ± 2.8 mmHg), NCT (13.6 ± 2.5 mmHg), Tonopen XL (13.7 ± 4.1 mmHg), and Icare PRO (12.6 ± 2.2 mmHg; Bonferroni test). There was no significant difference in mean IOP among GAT, NCT, and Tonopen XL. Regarding inter-device agreement, ICC was lower between Tonopen XL and other tonometers (all ICCs < 0.4). However, ICCs of GAT, iCare, Icare PRO, and NCT showed good agreement (0.576–0.700). The Bland–Altman analysis revealed that the width of the 95% limits of agreement was larger between the Tonopen XL and the other tonometers ranged from 14.94 to 16.47 mmHg. Among the other tonometers, however, the widths of 95% limits of agreement ranged from 7.91 to 9.24 mmHg.

Conclusion: There was good inter-device agreement among GAT, rebound tonometers, and NCT. Tonopen XL shows the worst agreement with the other tonometers; therefore, we should pay attention to its’ respective IOP.