A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Effect of instrument orientation on the accuracy of intraocular pressure measurements in human cadaveric eyes: manometric evaluation of the model 30 classic Pneumatonometer and Tono-Pen XL. | LitMetric

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Purpose: To determine the effects of probe orientation on the accuracy of intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements obtained with pneumatonometry (Model 30 Classic Pneumatonometer, Reichert Ophthalmic Instruments, Depew, NY) and with a handheld electronic tonometer (Tono-Pen XL, Reichert Ophthalmic Instruments, Depew, NY).

Materials And Methods: Six enucleated human eyes were obtained fewer than 24 hours postmortem. IOP was maintained at 10, 20, and 30 mm Hg, sequentially, via liquid column manometry. At each IOP setpoint, the eyes were positioned to mimic a sitting, supine, and prone patient. Pneumatonometry was performed in the sitting and supine orientations. Tono-Pen measurements were performed in the sitting, supine, and prone orientations. Accuracy was analyzed using multifactor repeated measures analysis of variance, and one-sample t tests.

Results: At all IOP setpoints, for both instruments, probe orientation had no significant effect on the IOP measurement (pneumatonometer P=0.58; Tono-Pen P=0.85). At all 3 setpoints (10, 20, and 30 mm Hg) the pneumatonometer overestimated IOP (P<0.0001; P<0.0001; P=0.005, respectively). The Tono-Pen overestimated IOP at the 10 mm Hg setpoint (P<0.0001), but underestimated IOP at the 20 and 30 mm Hg setpoints (P=0.03; P<0.0001, respectively).

Conclusions: Under experimental conditions, probe orientation had no significant effect on IOP measurements for either instrument, suggesting that both can be used without correction in the tested orientations. In enucleated human cadaveric eyes, the pneumatonometer overestimated IOP at all setpoints. The handheld electronic tonometer overestimated IOP at 10 mm Hg, but underestimated IOP at the higher setpoints. It is unknown if these findings are generalizable to human eyes in vivo.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/IJG.0b013e3181f46324DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

sitting supine
12
orientation accuracy
8
accuracy intraocular
8
intraocular pressure
8
model classic
8
classic pneumatonometer
8
probe orientation
8
reichert ophthalmic
8
ophthalmic instruments
8
instruments depew
8

Similar Publications