Clinical Study
Eye (2008) 22, 503–506; doi:10.1038/sj.eye.6702669; published online 8 December 2006
Comparison of the ICare® rebound tonometer with the Goldmann applanation tonometer by experienced and inexperienced tonometrists
The authors have no proprietary or commercial interest in ICare®
L M Abraham1, N C R Epasinghe1, D Selva1 and R Casson1
1Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, South Australian Institute of Ophthalmology, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
Correspondence: LM Abraham, Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, South Austraia 5000, Australia. Tel: +61 8 82225222; Fax: +61 8 82225221; E-mail: lekhaabraham@ yahoo.com
Received 1 February 2006; Accepted 30 October 2006; Published online 8 December 2006.
Abstract
Purpose
To assess the agreement between ICare® rebound tonometer and Goldmann applanation tonometer in the hands of experienced and inexperienced tonometrists.
Patients and methods
Two tonometrists, experienced with both Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) and ICare® Tonometry (ICT) measured intraocular pressure (IOP), in a masked fashion, in 100 patients. In another series of 58 patients, ICT was performed by an inexperienced tonometrist and GAT by an experienced tonometrist.
Results
In approximately 80%
of patients, the difference in IOP between GAT and ICT was 
2 mmHg in group 1 and 3 mmHg in group 2. The 95%
limits of agreement were -
4.0–4.4 mmHg in group 1 and -
6.0–5.0 mmHg in group 2.
Conclusion
ICT compares reasonably with GAT, in both experienced and inexperienced hands. Its ease of use, portability, and sterility make it an attractive tonometer. Its degree of accuracy in inexperienced hands would make it a useful instrument for health care workers with limited ophthalmic experience.
Keywords:
intraocular pressure, applanation tonometer, rebound tonometer, agreement
