Comparison of intraocular pressure measurement with Schiotz tonometer and Tono-Pen Vet tonometer in healthy dogs

Open access

Abstract

Introduction: Measurement of intraocular pressure (IOP) in dogs has high diagnostic value because of the possibility of detecting ocular and systemic diseases. Various types of tonometers are available for this measurement in small animal practice. The aim of the study was to compare the IOP values measured with Schiotz and Tono-Pen Vet tonometers in healthy dogs. Clinical diagnostic usefulness of both models was also evaluated.

Material and Methods: The examination was performed in 62 eyes in 31 clinically healthy dogs of different races, gender, and ages.

Results: The values for intraocular pressure obtained with Schiotz tonometer were in the range of 12 to 24 mmHg, with the mean of 16.3 ± 2.1 mmHg. The intraocular pressure measured with Tono-Pen Vet tonometer was in the range of 11–25 mmHg, with a mean of 18.1 ± 3.8 mmHg. The mean results of measurements taken using the two tonometers differed statistically significantly, the difference being 1.79 mmHg and the higher values being read from the Tono-Pen Vet tonometer.

Conclusion: Correlation coefficients calculated for the results obtained in the right and left eyes using two tonometers indicated highly correlative relationships between the results. The study shows that both tonometers can be advantageously used in clinical practice to measure intraocular pressure in dogs.

References

  • 1. Andrade S.F., Palozzi R.J., Giuffrida R., de Campos R.J., de Campos Santos G., Fukui R.M.: Comparison of intraocular pressure measurements between the Tono-Pen XL® and Perkins® applanation tonometers in dogs and cats. Vet Ophthalmol 2012, 15, 14–20.

  • 2. Christoffersen T., Holtedahl K., Ringberg U., Fors T.: Can the Tono-Pen replace the Schiotz tonometer in general practice? Scand J Prim Health Care 1998, 16, 238–241.

  • 3. Estrovich I., Shen C., Chu Y., Downs J., Gardiner S., Straiko M., Mansberger S.: Schiotz tonometry accurately measures intraocular pressure in Boston type 1 keratoprosthesis eyes. Cornea 2015, 34, 682–685.

  • 4. Gelatt K.N., MacKay E.O.: Distribution of intraocular pressure in dogs. Vet Ophthalmol 1998, 1, 109–114.

  • 5. Iester M., Mermoud A., Achache F., Roy S.: New Tonopen XL: comparison with the Goldmann tonometer. Eye 2001, 15, 52–58.

  • 6. Kok M., Berendschot T., Hardus P.: Schiotz tonometry for glaucoma: are there simple alternatives? Trop Med Int Health 1998, 3, 210–213.

  • 7. Knollinger A.M., La Croix N.C., Barrett P.M., Miller P.E.: Evaluation of a rebound tonometer for measuring intraocular pressure in dogs and horses. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2005, 227, 244–248.

  • 8. Leiva M., Naranjo C., Peña M.T.: Comparison of the rebound tonometer (ICare) to the applanation tonometer (Tonopen XL) in normotensive dogs. Vet Ophthalmol 2006, 9, 17–21.

  • 9. Li Y., Shi J., Duan X., Fan F.: Transpalpebral measurement of intraocular pressure using the Diaton tonometer versus standard Goldmann applanation tonometry. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2010, 248, 1765–1770.

  • 10. Maggs D.J.: Basic diagnostic techniques. In: Slatter’s Fundamentals of Veterinary Ophthalmology, edited by J. Garncarz, Elsevier Urban & Partner, Wrocław, 2009, pp. 88–116.

  • 11. Madany J., Clerc B., Pomorski Z.: Tonometria – mierzenie napięcia gałki ocznej. Mag Wet 1995, 4, 37–38.

  • 12. Martin-Suárez E., Molleda C., Tardón R., Galán A., Gallardo J., Molleda J.: Diurnal variations of central corneal thickness and intraocular pressure in dogs from 8:00 am to 8:00 pm. Can Vet J 2014, 55, 361–365.

  • 13. Miller P.E., Pickett J.P., Majors L.J., Kurzman I.D.: Clinical comparison of the Mackay-Marg and Tono-Pen applanation tonometer in the dog. Prog Vet Comp Ophthalmol 1991, 1, 171–176.

  • 14. Ponka D., Baddar F.: Schiotz tonometry. Can Fam Physician 2014, 60, 252.

  • 15. Stevens S.: How to measure intraocular pressure: Schiötz tonometry. Comm Eye Health J 2008, 21, 34.

  • 16. Tonnu P.A., Ho T., Sharma K., White E., Bunce C., Garway-Heath D.: A comparison of four methods of tonometry: method agreement and interobserver variability. Br J Ophthalmol 2005, 89, 847–850.

  • 17. Whitacre M.M., Emig M., Hassanein K.: The effect of Perkins, Tono-Pen, and Schiötz tonometry on intraocular pressure. Am J Ophthalmol 1991, 111, 59–64.

  • 18. Von Spiessen L., Karck J., Rohn K., Meyer-Lindenberg A.: Clinical comparison of the TonoVet(®) rebound tonometer and the Tono-Pen Vet(®) applanation tonometer in dogs and cats with ocular disease: glaucoma or corneal pathology. Vet Ophthalmol 2015, 18, 20–27.

  • 19. Yamamoto L.G., Young D.A.: Tonometry methods in the pediatric emergency department. Pediatr Emerg Care 2010, 26, 678–683.

  • 20. Yilmaz I., Altan C., Ayqit E.D., Alaqoz C., Baz O., Ahmet S., Urvasizoqlu S., Yasa D., Demirok A.: Comparison of three methods of tonometry in normal subjects: Goldmann applanation tonometer, non-contact airpuff tonometer, and Tono-Pen XL. Clin Ophthalmol 2014, 8, 1069–1074.

Journal of Veterinary Research

formerly Bulletin of the Veterinary Institute in Pulawy

Journal Information


IMPACT FACTOR Bull Vet Inst Pulawy 2016: 0.462

CiteScore 2016: 0.46

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2015: 0.230
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2015: 0.383

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 57 57 50
PDF Downloads 20 20 17