Rebound Tonometry in Children A Report by the American Academy of Ophthalmology
Rebound Tonometry in Children A Report by the American Academy of Ophthalmology
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.ophtha.2012.09.058
复制
发表时间：
2013-04-01
期刊：
影响因子：
13.7
通讯作者：
Yang, Michael B.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Lambert, Scott R.;Melia, Michele;Yang, Michael B.
目的：比较使用反跳眼压计和压平眼压计测量18岁及以下儿童的眼内压（IOP），以及在儿童中使用这些技术的可行性。方法：PubMed和科克伦图书馆数据库的文献检索最后一次进行于2012年6月，结果在43引文，包括非英文引文。在这43篇引文中，4项研究在全文审查后符合纳入标准。一个级别的证据评级被分配到每个研究使用专门为这个assessment.Results开发的标准：没有一级研究被发现在文献检索，2级II和2级III的研究被确定。在2项在诊所环境中进行的II级研究和1项在全身麻醉下对儿童进行的III级研究中，与Goldmann压平眼压测量相比，使用回弹眼压测量的眼内压高2 - 3 mmHg。然而，在1项III级研究中，IOP较低，其中将非接触压平眼压计与回弹眼压计进行了比较。Bland-Altman图显示，反跳眼压测量与Goldmann压平眼压测量的IOP差异随IOP增加而增加。测量眼压的成功率显着高于3岁及以下的儿童使用反弹眼压测量相比，非接触式眼压在1级III study.Conclusions：反弹眼压测量似乎是一个合理的准确的仪器，使眼压测量在许多儿童不使用全身麻醉。需要更多的数据来更好地评估仪器之间的差异如何随着IOP测量而变化。财务披露：作者对本文中讨论的任何材料没有专有或商业利益。Ophthalmology 2013; 120：e21-e27（C）2013，美国眼科学会。
Objective: To compare intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements in children 18 years of age and younger using rebound tonometry and applanation tonometry and the feasibility of using these techniques in children.Methods: Literature searches of the PubMed and the Cochrane Library databases were last conducted in June 2012 and resulted in 43 citations, including citations not in English. Of these 43 citations, 4 studies met the inclusion criterion following full text review. A level of evidence rating was assigned to each study using criteria specifically developed for this assessment.Results: No level I study was found in the literature search, and 2 level II and 2 level III studies were identified. Intraocular pressure was 2 to 3 mmHg higher using rebound tonometry compared with Goldmann applanation tonometry in the 2 level II studies performed in a clinic setting and in 1 level III study performed on children under general anesthesia. However, IOP was lower in 1 level III study in which noncontact applanation tonometry was compared with rebound tonometry. Bland-Altman plots showed that the difference in IOP for rebound versus Goldmann applanation tonometry increased as the IOP increased. The success rate for measuring IOP was markedly higher in children 3 years of age and younger using rebound tonometry compared with noncontact tonometry in 1 level III study.Conclusions: Rebound tonometry seems to be a reasonably accurate instrument that allows the IOP to be measured in many children without using general anesthesia. More data are required to assess better how the differences between instruments vary with IOP measurement.Financial Disclosure(s): The author(s) have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article. Ophthalmology 2013; 120: e21-e27 (C) 2013 by the American Academy of Ophthalmology.