Icare ONE rebound versus Goldmann applanation tonometry in children with known or suspected glaucoma.
PURPOSE: To compare Icare ONE tonometry by clinic examiner and parent/guardian to Goldmann applanation in children with known/suspected glaucoma; to evaluate the trend in intraocular pressure (IOP) with 4 repeated measurements using Icare ONE; and to evaluate the feasibility of instructing parents on the use of the Icare ONE device in the clinic setting. DESIGN: Nonrandomized, prospective clinical study. METHODS: Patients with known or suspected glaucoma were recruited from the Duke pediatric glaucoma clinic. Parent(s) of all subjects gave informed consent (and children gave assent) for participation in this research study. IOP was measured using Icare ONE by clinic examiner and parent/guardian, then using Goldmann applanation (masked physician). Each parent/guardian completed an ease-of-use survey. RESULTS: Sixty eyes (60 children) were included. Absolute value of mean IOP difference (ICare ONE clinic examiner vs Goldmann applanation) was 3.3 ± 4.0 mm Hg (P = .001). Icare ONE IOP by clinic examiner was within 3 mm Hg of Goldmann applanation in 68% (n = 41 eyes). In eyes with >3 mm Hg difference, Icare ONE was higher than Goldmann applanation in 84%. IOP demonstrated a statistically significant downward trend with repeated sequential measurements with Icare ONE (P = .0053, r(2) = 0.9894). All parents accomplished Icare ONE tonometry on at least 1 eye; 98% reported it was "easy to learn to use." CONCLUSION: Icare ONE tonometry appears accurate and well-tolerated compared to Goldmann applanation, and holds promise for clinic and home tonometry in children. IOP trends downward with successive measurements using Icare ONE, demonstrating a possible effect from presumed patient relaxation.
Gandhi, NG; Prakalapakorn, SG; El-Dairi, MA; Jones, SK; Freedman, SF
Volume / Issue
Start / End Page
Pubmed Central ID
Electronic International Standard Serial Number (EISSN)
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)