Comparison of aqueous outflow facility measurement by pneumatonography and digital schiøtz tonography

Arash Kazemi, Jay W. McLaren, Shuai Chun Lin, Carol B. Toris, Vikas Gulati, Sayoko E. Moroi, Arthur J Sit

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

PURPOSE. It is not known if outflow facilities measured by pneumatonography and Schiøtz tonography are interchangeable. In this study we compared outflow facility measured by pneumatonography to outflow facility measured by digital Schiøtz tonography. METHODS. Fifty-six eyes from 28 healthy participants, ages 41 to 68 years, were included. Intraocular pressure (IOP) was measured in the sitting and supine positions with a pneumatonometer. With the subject in the supine position, IOP was recorded for 2 minutes by using a pneumatonometer with a 10-g weight and for 4 minutes by using a custom digital Schiøtz tonometer. Outflow facility was determined from the changes in pressure and intraocular volume and a standard assumed ocular rigidity coefficient for each instrument, respectively, and by using an ocular rigidity coefficient calculated by measuring pressure without and with a weight added to the pneumatonometer tip. RESULTS. The outflow facility was 0.29 ± 0.09 μL/min/mm Hg by Schiøtz tonography and 0.24 ± 0.08 μL/min/mm Hg by pneumatonography (P < 0.001) when using the standard assumed constant ocular rigidity coefficient. Mean calculated ocular rigidity coefficient was 0.028 ± 0.01 μL-1, and outflow facility determined by using this coefficient was 0.23 ± 0.08 μL/min/ mm Hg by Schiøtz tonography and 0.21 ± 0.07 μL/min/mm Hg by pneumatonography (P = 0.003). Outflow facilities measured by the two devices were correlated when the ocular rigidity was assumed (r = 0.60, P < 0.001) or calculated (r = 0.70, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS. Outflow facilities measured by pneumatonography were correlated with those measured by Schiøtz tonography, but Schiøtz tonography reported approximately 10% to 20% higher facilities when using the standard method. When ocular rigidity was determined for each eye, differences were smaller. Measurements from these devices cannot be compared directly.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)204-210
Number of pages7
JournalInvestigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science
Volume58
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2017

Fingerprint

Intraocular Pressure
Supine Position
Weights and Measures
Equipment and Supplies
Posture
Healthy Volunteers
Pressure

Keywords

  • Aqueous outflow facility
  • Ocular rigidity
  • Tonography
  • Tonometry

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ophthalmology
  • Sensory Systems
  • Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience

Cite this

Comparison of aqueous outflow facility measurement by pneumatonography and digital schiøtz tonography. / Kazemi, Arash; McLaren, Jay W.; Lin, Shuai Chun; Toris, Carol B.; Gulati, Vikas; Moroi, Sayoko E.; Sit, Arthur J.

In: Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Vol. 58, No. 1, 01.01.2017, p. 204-210.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Kazemi, Arash ; McLaren, Jay W. ; Lin, Shuai Chun ; Toris, Carol B. ; Gulati, Vikas ; Moroi, Sayoko E. ; Sit, Arthur J. / Comparison of aqueous outflow facility measurement by pneumatonography and digital schiøtz tonography. In: Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science. 2017 ; Vol. 58, No. 1. pp. 204-210.
@article{8fbd15fd19e443af8daf750d5a4ed310,
title = "Comparison of aqueous outflow facility measurement by pneumatonography and digital schi{\o}tz tonography",
abstract = "PURPOSE. It is not known if outflow facilities measured by pneumatonography and Schi{\o}tz tonography are interchangeable. In this study we compared outflow facility measured by pneumatonography to outflow facility measured by digital Schi{\o}tz tonography. METHODS. Fifty-six eyes from 28 healthy participants, ages 41 to 68 years, were included. Intraocular pressure (IOP) was measured in the sitting and supine positions with a pneumatonometer. With the subject in the supine position, IOP was recorded for 2 minutes by using a pneumatonometer with a 10-g weight and for 4 minutes by using a custom digital Schi{\o}tz tonometer. Outflow facility was determined from the changes in pressure and intraocular volume and a standard assumed ocular rigidity coefficient for each instrument, respectively, and by using an ocular rigidity coefficient calculated by measuring pressure without and with a weight added to the pneumatonometer tip. RESULTS. The outflow facility was 0.29 ± 0.09 μL/min/mm Hg by Schi{\o}tz tonography and 0.24 ± 0.08 μL/min/mm Hg by pneumatonography (P < 0.001) when using the standard assumed constant ocular rigidity coefficient. Mean calculated ocular rigidity coefficient was 0.028 ± 0.01 μL-1, and outflow facility determined by using this coefficient was 0.23 ± 0.08 μL/min/ mm Hg by Schi{\o}tz tonography and 0.21 ± 0.07 μL/min/mm Hg by pneumatonography (P = 0.003). Outflow facilities measured by the two devices were correlated when the ocular rigidity was assumed (r = 0.60, P < 0.001) or calculated (r = 0.70, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS. Outflow facilities measured by pneumatonography were correlated with those measured by Schi{\o}tz tonography, but Schi{\o}tz tonography reported approximately 10{\%} to 20{\%} higher facilities when using the standard method. When ocular rigidity was determined for each eye, differences were smaller. Measurements from these devices cannot be compared directly.",
keywords = "Aqueous outflow facility, Ocular rigidity, Tonography, Tonometry",
author = "Arash Kazemi and McLaren, {Jay W.} and Lin, {Shuai Chun} and Toris, {Carol B.} and Vikas Gulati and Moroi, {Sayoko E.} and Sit, {Arthur J}",
year = "2017",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1167/iovs.16-20754",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "58",
pages = "204--210",
journal = "Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science",
issn = "0146-0404",
publisher = "Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology Inc.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of aqueous outflow facility measurement by pneumatonography and digital schiøtz tonography

AU - Kazemi, Arash

AU - McLaren, Jay W.

AU - Lin, Shuai Chun

AU - Toris, Carol B.

AU - Gulati, Vikas

AU - Moroi, Sayoko E.

AU - Sit, Arthur J

PY - 2017/1/1

Y1 - 2017/1/1

N2 - PURPOSE. It is not known if outflow facilities measured by pneumatonography and Schiøtz tonography are interchangeable. In this study we compared outflow facility measured by pneumatonography to outflow facility measured by digital Schiøtz tonography. METHODS. Fifty-six eyes from 28 healthy participants, ages 41 to 68 years, were included. Intraocular pressure (IOP) was measured in the sitting and supine positions with a pneumatonometer. With the subject in the supine position, IOP was recorded for 2 minutes by using a pneumatonometer with a 10-g weight and for 4 minutes by using a custom digital Schiøtz tonometer. Outflow facility was determined from the changes in pressure and intraocular volume and a standard assumed ocular rigidity coefficient for each instrument, respectively, and by using an ocular rigidity coefficient calculated by measuring pressure without and with a weight added to the pneumatonometer tip. RESULTS. The outflow facility was 0.29 ± 0.09 μL/min/mm Hg by Schiøtz tonography and 0.24 ± 0.08 μL/min/mm Hg by pneumatonography (P < 0.001) when using the standard assumed constant ocular rigidity coefficient. Mean calculated ocular rigidity coefficient was 0.028 ± 0.01 μL-1, and outflow facility determined by using this coefficient was 0.23 ± 0.08 μL/min/ mm Hg by Schiøtz tonography and 0.21 ± 0.07 μL/min/mm Hg by pneumatonography (P = 0.003). Outflow facilities measured by the two devices were correlated when the ocular rigidity was assumed (r = 0.60, P < 0.001) or calculated (r = 0.70, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS. Outflow facilities measured by pneumatonography were correlated with those measured by Schiøtz tonography, but Schiøtz tonography reported approximately 10% to 20% higher facilities when using the standard method. When ocular rigidity was determined for each eye, differences were smaller. Measurements from these devices cannot be compared directly.

AB - PURPOSE. It is not known if outflow facilities measured by pneumatonography and Schiøtz tonography are interchangeable. In this study we compared outflow facility measured by pneumatonography to outflow facility measured by digital Schiøtz tonography. METHODS. Fifty-six eyes from 28 healthy participants, ages 41 to 68 years, were included. Intraocular pressure (IOP) was measured in the sitting and supine positions with a pneumatonometer. With the subject in the supine position, IOP was recorded for 2 minutes by using a pneumatonometer with a 10-g weight and for 4 minutes by using a custom digital Schiøtz tonometer. Outflow facility was determined from the changes in pressure and intraocular volume and a standard assumed ocular rigidity coefficient for each instrument, respectively, and by using an ocular rigidity coefficient calculated by measuring pressure without and with a weight added to the pneumatonometer tip. RESULTS. The outflow facility was 0.29 ± 0.09 μL/min/mm Hg by Schiøtz tonography and 0.24 ± 0.08 μL/min/mm Hg by pneumatonography (P < 0.001) when using the standard assumed constant ocular rigidity coefficient. Mean calculated ocular rigidity coefficient was 0.028 ± 0.01 μL-1, and outflow facility determined by using this coefficient was 0.23 ± 0.08 μL/min/ mm Hg by Schiøtz tonography and 0.21 ± 0.07 μL/min/mm Hg by pneumatonography (P = 0.003). Outflow facilities measured by the two devices were correlated when the ocular rigidity was assumed (r = 0.60, P < 0.001) or calculated (r = 0.70, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS. Outflow facilities measured by pneumatonography were correlated with those measured by Schiøtz tonography, but Schiøtz tonography reported approximately 10% to 20% higher facilities when using the standard method. When ocular rigidity was determined for each eye, differences were smaller. Measurements from these devices cannot be compared directly.

KW - Aqueous outflow facility

KW - Ocular rigidity

KW - Tonography

KW - Tonometry

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85010869986&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85010869986&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1167/iovs.16-20754

DO - 10.1167/iovs.16-20754

M3 - Article

C2 - 28114581

AN - SCOPUS:85010869986

VL - 58

SP - 204

EP - 210

JO - Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science

JF - Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science

SN - 0146-0404

IS - 1

ER -