Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMcCafferty, Sean
dc.contributor.authorEnikov, Eniko
dc.contributor.authorSchwiegerling, Jim
dc.contributor.authorAshley, Sean
dc.date.accessioned2018-02-12T16:16:57Z
dc.date.available2018-02-12T16:16:57Z
dc.date.issued2018-01
dc.identifier.citationGoldmann tonometry tear film error and partial correction with a shaped applanation surface 2018, Volume 12:71 Clinical Ophthalmologyen
dc.identifier.issn1177-5483
dc.identifier.pmid29379267
dc.identifier.doi10.2147/OPTH.S152492
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10150/626544
dc.description.abstractPurpose: The aim of the study was to quantify the isolated tear film adhesion error in a Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT) prism and in a correcting applanation tonometry surface (CATS) prism. Methods: The separation force of a tonometer prism adhered by a tear film to a simulated cornea was measured to quantify an isolated tear film adhesion force. Acrylic hemispheres (7.8 mm radius) used as corneas were lathed over the apical 3.06 mm diameter to simulate full applanation contact with the prism surface for both GAT and CATS prisms. Tear film separation measurements were completed with both an artificial tear and fluorescein solutions as a fluid bridge. The applanation mire thicknesses were measured and correlated with the tear film separation measurements. Human cadaver eyes were used to validate simulated cornea tear film separation measurement differences between the GAT and CATS prisms. Results: The CATS prism tear film adhesion error (2.74 +/- 0.21 mmHg) was significantly less than the GAT prism (4.57 +/- 0.18 mmHg, p<0.001). Tear film adhesion error was independent of applanation mire thickness (R-2=0.09, p=0.04). Fluorescein produces more tear film error than artificial tears (+0.51 +/- 0.04 mmHg; p<0.001). Cadaver eye validation indicated the CATS prism's tear film adhesion error (1.40 +/- 0.51 mmHg) was significantly less than that of the GAT prism (3.30 +/- 0.38 mmHg; p=0.002). Conclusion: Measured GAT tear film adhesion error is more than previously predicted. A CATS prism significantly reduced tear film adhesion error by similar to 41%. Fluorescein solution increases the tear film adhesion compared to artificial tears, while mire thickness has a negligible effect.
dc.description.sponsorshipNIH SBIR [R43 EY026821-01]; Arizona Eye Consultants, Tucson, AZen
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherDOVE MEDICAL PRESS LTDen
dc.relation.urlhttps://www.dovepress.com/goldmann-tonometry-tear-film-error-and-partial-correction-with-a-shape-peer-reviewed-article-OPTHen
dc.rights© 2018 McCafferty et al. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License.en
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/
dc.subjectglaucomaen
dc.subjectintraocular pressureen
dc.subjectIOPen
dc.subjectGoldmannen
dc.subjectbiasen
dc.subjecterroren
dc.subjecttonometeren
dc.subjectapplanationen
dc.subjecttear filmen
dc.titleGoldmann tonometry tear film error and partial correction with a shaped applanation surfaceen
dc.typeArticleen
dc.contributor.departmentUniv Arizona, Coll Med, Dept Ophthalmolen
dc.contributor.departmentUniv Arizona, Coll Opt Scien
dc.contributor.departmentUniv Arizona, Coll Engn, Dept Mech & Aerospen
dc.identifier.journalClinical Ophthalmologyen
dc.description.collectioninformationThis item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at repository@u.library.arizona.edu.en
dc.eprint.versionFinal published versionen
refterms.dateFOA2018-05-18T03:58:16Z
html.description.abstractPurpose: The aim of the study was to quantify the isolated tear film adhesion error in a Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT) prism and in a correcting applanation tonometry surface (CATS) prism. Methods: The separation force of a tonometer prism adhered by a tear film to a simulated cornea was measured to quantify an isolated tear film adhesion force. Acrylic hemispheres (7.8 mm radius) used as corneas were lathed over the apical 3.06 mm diameter to simulate full applanation contact with the prism surface for both GAT and CATS prisms. Tear film separation measurements were completed with both an artificial tear and fluorescein solutions as a fluid bridge. The applanation mire thicknesses were measured and correlated with the tear film separation measurements. Human cadaver eyes were used to validate simulated cornea tear film separation measurement differences between the GAT and CATS prisms. Results: The CATS prism tear film adhesion error (2.74 +/- 0.21 mmHg) was significantly less than the GAT prism (4.57 +/- 0.18 mmHg, p<0.001). Tear film adhesion error was independent of applanation mire thickness (R-2=0.09, p=0.04). Fluorescein produces more tear film error than artificial tears (+0.51 +/- 0.04 mmHg; p<0.001). Cadaver eye validation indicated the CATS prism's tear film adhesion error (1.40 +/- 0.51 mmHg) was significantly less than that of the GAT prism (3.30 +/- 0.38 mmHg; p=0.002). Conclusion: Measured GAT tear film adhesion error is more than previously predicted. A CATS prism significantly reduced tear film adhesion error by similar to 41%. Fluorescein solution increases the tear film adhesion compared to artificial tears, while mire thickness has a negligible effect.


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
OPTH-152492-goldmann-tonometry ...
Size:
4.733Mb
Format:
PDF
Description:
Final Published Version

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

© 2018 McCafferty et al. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License.
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as © 2018 McCafferty et al. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License.