Effect of manual eyelid manipulation on intraocular pressure measurement by rebound tonometry
British Journal of Ophthalmology, ISSN: 1468-2079, Vol: 102, Issue: 11, Page: 1515-1519
2018
- 9Citations
- 15Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations9
- Citation Indexes9
- CrossRef4
- Captures15
- Readers15
- 15
Article Description
Background/aims To investigate the effect of eyelid manipulation on the measurement of intraocular pressure (IOP) using two different tonometries (rebound tonometry (RT) vs Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT)). Methods 103 patients with primary open-angle glaucoma were prospectively enrolled. For all of the patients, IOP measurements were performed in three different ways: (1) RT with lid manipulation (LM), (2) RT without LM and (3) GAT. The order of the three measurements was randomly selected. Additionally, the palpebral fissure height (PFH; elliptical space between upper and lower eyelids) was measured. Results The mean value of IOP measured by GAT was 13.97±2.80 mm Hg, which was not significantly different from that by RT without LM (13.75±2.44 mm Hg; P=0.096), but which was significantly lower than that by RT with LM (15.21±2.91 mm Hg; P<0.001). On a Bland-Altman plot, RT with LM was overestimated relative to GAT (mean:-1.5) and RT without LM (mean:-1.2). Among the high IOPs (>20 mm Hg), interestingly, those measured by RT without LM were significantly lower than those measured by GAT (P<0.001). In the subgroup analysis of PFH, the smaller the PFH, the more exaggerated the IOP difference between GAT (P=0.014) and RT with LM (P<0.001). Conclusion RT-measured IOP was significantly exaggerated when manipulation was applied to the eyelid. This overall trend was more pronounced when PFH was small. GAT-measured IOP, meanwhile, showed a good correlation with IOP measured using RT without LM.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85055149972&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2017-311587; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29420194; https://bjo.bmj.com/lookup/doi/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2017-311587; https://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2017-311587; https://bjo.bmj.com/content/102/11/1515
BMJ
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know