论文部分内容阅读
目的比较Goldmann压平眼压计(GAT)、Schiotz眼压计和非接触眼压计(NCT)对青光眼排查患者测得的眼压值,探讨眼压计类型对患者眼压值的影响。方法对43例可疑青光眼排查患者(67只眼,34～58岁),进行24小时眼压曲线测量。先在卧位下使用压陷眼压计进行测量,然后在坐位下分别使用压平和非接触眼压计进行测量。采用方差分析比较不同测量方法所获得的眼压值。结果 Schiotz眼压计、GAT及NCT测得的眼压平均值分别为(24.58±9.76)、(22.13±8.25)、(18.51±7.48)mmHg(1mmHg=0.133kPa)。所测得的眼压值,GAT较NCT高1.7～3.1mmHg,Schiotz眼压计较NCT高3.0～6.4mmHg。三种测量方法测得的峰值眼压超过21mmHg的患者分别为36,27,19例,使用非接触眼压计可能漏诊青光眼的患者。结论使用GAT、Schiotz眼压计和NCT所得出的眼压曲线有所不同,使用NCT对靶眼压附近的眼压难以作出准确的判断。
Objective To compare the intraocular pressure (IOP) measured by Goldmann tonometry tonometer (GAT), Schiotz tonometer and non-contact tonometer (NCT) in patients undergoing glaucoma screening and to investigate the influence of tonometer types on IOP. Methods Totally 43 patients with suspected glaucoma (67 eyes, 34-58 years old) were examined for intraocular pressure (IOP) curve at 24 hours. Measurements were first taken using a pressure tonometer in the supine position and then measured using a flattened and non-contact tonometer at the seat. ANOVA was used to compare the intraocular pressure values obtained by different measurement methods. Results The mean intraocular pressure measured by Schiotz tonometer, GAT and NCT were (24.58 ± 9.76), (22.13 ± 8.25) and (18.51 ± 7.48) mmHg (1 mmHg = 0.133 kPa), respectively. The measured intraocular pressure value, GAT higher than NCT 1.7 ~ 3.1mmHg, Schiotz tonometer than NCT high 3.0 ~ 6.4mmHg. Patients with peak IOP exceeding 21 mm Hg measured by the three methods were 36, 27, and 19, respectively, and patients who missed the glaucoma with a non-contact tonometer were excluded. Conclusions The IOP curves obtained by GAT, Schiotz tonometer and NCT are different. It is difficult to judge the intraocular pressure near the target IOP with NCT.