Evaluation of some factors affecting the agreement between the Proview Eye Pressure Monitor and the Goldmann applanation tonometer measurements

REFERENCES

• Fresco BB. A new tonometer‐the pressure phosphene tonometer: clinical comparison with Goldmann tonometry. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 2123–2126.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alvarez TL, Gollance SA, Thomas GA, Greene RJ, Marchetto PM, Moore EJ, Realini T, Liebmann JM, Ritch R, Lama P, Fechtner RD. The Proview phosphene tonometer fails to measure ocular pressure accurately in clinical practice. Ophthalmology 2004; 111: 1077–1085.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lam DS, Leung DY, Chiu TY, Fan DS, Cheung EY, Wong TY, Lai JS, Tham CC. Pressure phosphene self‐tonometry: a comparison with Goldmann tonometry in glaucoma patients. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2004; 45: 3131–3136.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chew GS, Sanderson GF, Molteno AC. The pressure phosphene tonometer: a clinical evaluation. Eye 2005; 19: 683–685.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li J, Herndon LW, Asrani SG, Stinnett S, Allingham RR. Clinical comparison of the Proview eye pressure monitor with the Goldmann applanation tonometer and the Tonopen. Arch Ophthalmol 2004; 122: 1117–1121.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Danesh‐meyer HV, Niederer R, Gaskin BJ, Gamble G. Comparison of the Proview pressure phosphene tonometer performed by the patient and examiner with the Goldmann applanation tonometer. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol 2004; 32: 29–32.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bonomi L, Mecca E, Massa F. Intraocular pressure in myopic anisometropia. Int Ophthalmol 1982; 5: 145–148.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Recep OF, Hasiripi H, Vayisoglu E, Kalayci D, Sarikatipoglu H. Accurate time interval in repeated tonometry. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 1998; 76: 603–605.
   Google Scholar
• Cronbach LJ. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 1951; 16: 297–334.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986; 1 (8476): 307–310.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nunnaly J. Psychometric Theory. New York: McGraw‐Hill, 1978.
   Google Scholar
• Ehlers N, Bramsen T, Sperling S. Applanation tonometry and central corneal thickness. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 1975; 53: 34–43.
   Google Scholar
• Bhan A, Browning AC, Shah S, Hamilton R, Dave D, Dua HS. Effect of corneal thickness on intraocular pressure measurements with the pneumotonometer, Goldmann applanation tonometer and Tono‐Pen. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2002; 43: 1389–1392.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Copt RP, Thomas R, Mermoud A. Corneal thickness in ocular hypertension, primary open‐angle glaucoma, and normal tension glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol 1999; 117: 14–16.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gunvant P, Baskaran M, Vijaya L, Joseph IS, Watkins RJ, Nallapothula M, Broadway DC, O’leary DJ. Effect of corneal parameters on measurements using the pulsatile ocular blood flow tonograph and Goldmann applanation tonometer. Br J Ophthalmol 2004; 88: 518–522.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herndon LW, Choudhri SA, Cox T, Damji KF, Shields MB, Allingham RR. Central corneal thickness in normal, glaucomatous and ocular hypertensive eyes. Arch Ophthalmol 1997; 115: 1137–1141.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stodtmeister R. Applanation tonometry and correction according to corneal thickness. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 1998; 76: 319–324.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tonnu PA, Ho T, Newson T, El sheikh A, Sharma K, White E, Bunce C, Garway‐heath D. The influence of central corneal thickness and age on intraocular pressure measured by pneumotonometry, non‐contact tonometry, the Tono‐Pen XL and Goldmann applanation tonometry. Br J Ophthalmol 2005; 89: 851–854.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eysteinsson T, Jonasson F, Sasaki H, Arnarsson A, Sverrisson T, Sasaki K, Stefansson E; Reykjavik eye study group. Central corneal thickness, radius of the corneal curvature and intraocular pressure in normal subjects using non‐contact techniques: Reykjavik Eye Study. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 2002; 80: 11–15.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Recep OF, Hasiripi H, Cagil N, Sarikatipoglu H. Relation between corneal thickness and intraocular pressure measurement by noncontact and applanation tonometry. J Cataract Refract Surg 2001; 27: 1787–1791.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Naruse S, Mori K, Kojo M, Hieda O, Kinoshita S. Evaluation of intraocular pressure change after laser in situ keratomileusis using the pressure phosphene tonometer. J Cataract Refract Surg 2004; 30: 390–397.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lievens CW, Gunvant P, Newman J, Gerstner M, Simpson C. Effect of Proview self‐tonometry on pharmaceutical compliance. Clin Exp Optom 2006; 89: 381–385.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• British Standards Institution. Precision of test methods 1: Guide for the determination and reproducibility for a standard test method (BS 5497, part 1). London: BSI, 1979.
   Google Scholar