Methods for measuring intraocular pressure: disadvantages and advantages

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription Access

Abstract

This review of the literature is devoted to the comparison of tonometers based on various operating principles, their advantages and disadvantages. The principles of operation of each considered in the review tonometer are discussed. The features of the structure and mechanisms for measuring the intraocular pressure of various tonometers are highlighted, on the basis of which the anatomical features and other factors that have the greatest impact on the reliability of measurement and accounting of the data obtained in clinical practice are determined.

About the authors

Alexander N. Samoylov

Kazan State Medical University; Professor E.V. Adamyuk Republican Clinical Hospital of Ophthalmology

Email: samoilovan16@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-0863-7762
SPIN-code: 8555-2067

Dr. Sci. (Med.), Professor, Head of the Department of Ophthalmology

Russian Federation, Kazan; Kazan

Polina A. Samoylova

Kazan State Medical University

Email: ya.samoilov12@yandex.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-7139-4033

Student

Russian Federation, Kazan

Nail R. Ahmetov

Kazan State Medical University

Author for correspondence.
Email: ahmetovn17@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-8216-5025
SPIN-code: 6511-9260

Postgraduate Student

Russian Federation, Kazan

Viktor A. Usov

Kazan State Medical University

Email: vik-usov@rambler.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-0549-783X
SPIN-code: 7840-8256

Cand. Sci. (Med.), Assistant of the Department of Ophthalmology

Russian Federation, Kazan

Raushaniya F. Gainutdinova

Kazan State Medical University

Email: rg_dinova@list.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-0094-1399

Cand. Sci. (Med.), Associate Professor of Ophthalmology Department

Russian Federation, Kazan

Guzel Z. Zakirova

Kazan State Medical University; Republic Childrens Hospital

Email: guzel-@list.ru

Cand. Sci. (Med.), Associate Professor of Ophthalmology Department

Russian Federation, Kazan; Kazan

References

  1. Bader J, Zeppieri M, Havens SJ. Tonometry. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing, 2022. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK493225/
  2. Brusini P, Salvetat ML, Zeppieri M. How to measure intraocular pressure: an updated review of various tonometers. J Clin Med. 2021;10(17):3860. doi: 10.3390/jcm10173860
  3. Nesterov AP, Piletskiĭ GK, Piletskiĭ NG. A transpalpebral tonometer for measuring the intraocular pressure. The Russian Annals of Ophthalmology. 2003;119(1):3–5. (In Russ.)
  4. Deutsch C, Christiansen N, Ossysek I, et al. Clinical calibration and in vitro evaluation of the validity of 2 microprocessor controlled tonometers. Ophthalmologe. 1996;93(5):544–548. (In German) doi: 10.1007/s003470050035
  5. Mark HH. Armand Imbert, Adolf Fick, and their tonometry law. Eye. 2012;26(1):13–16. doi: 10.1038/eye.2011.248
  6. Troost A, Yun SH, Specht K, et al. Transpalpebral tonometry: reliability and comparison with Goldmann applanation tonometry and palpation in healthy volunteers. Br J Ophthalmol. 2005;89(3): 80–283. doi: 10.1136/bjo.2004.050211
  7. Rubinfeld RS, Cohen EJ, Laibson PR, et al. The accuracy of finger tension for estimating intraocular pressure after penetrating keratoplasty. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers. 1998;29(3):213–215. doi: 10.3928/1542-8877-19980301-07
  8. Moshetova LK, Nesterov AP, Egorova EA, editors. Klinicheskie rekomendatsii. Oftal’mologiya. Moscow: GEHOTAR-Media, 2006. 237 p. (In Russ.)
  9. Albert DM, Keeler R. The Pressure: Before and after Schiøtz. Ophthalmol Glaucoma. 2020;3(6):409–413. doi: 10.1016/j.ogla.2020.04.015
  10. Cordero I. Understanding and caring for a Schiotz tonometer. Community Eye Health. 2014;27(87):57.
  11. Patel H, Gilmartin B, Cubbidge RP, Logan NS. In vivo measurement of regional variation in anterior scleral resistance to Schiotz indentation. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2011;31(5):437–443. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-1313.2011.00840.x
  12. Fedotov AA, Azima VYu. Razvitie metodov izmereniya vnutriglaznogo davleniya. Uchebnoe posobie. Ryazan, 2015. 15 p. (In Russ.)
  13. Lam DSC, Leung DYL, Chiu TYH, et al. Pressure phosphene self-tonometry: a comparison with Goldmann tonometry in glaucoma patients. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2004;45(9):3131–3136. doi: 10.1167/iovs.04-0115
  14. Brigatti L, Maguluri S. Reproducibility of self-measured intraocular pressure with the phosphene tonometer in patients with ocular hypertension and early to advanced glaucoma. J Glaucoma. 2005;14(1):36–39. doi: 10.1097/01.ijg.0000146374.59119.42
  15. Rai S, Moster MR, Kesen M, et al. Level of disagreement between Proview phosphene tonometer and Goldmann applanation tonometer intraocular pressure readings. J Glaucoma. 2005;14(2):120–123. doi: 10.1097/01.ijg.0000151887.51541.af
  16. Kontiola A, Päivi P. Measuring intraocular pressure with the Pulsair 3000 and Rebound tonometers in elderly patients without an anesthetic. Graefe’s archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology. 2004;242:3–7. doi: 10.1007/s00417-003-0671-3
  17. Rootman DS, Insler MS, Thompson HW, et al. Accuracy and precision of the Tono-Pen in measuring intraocular pressure after keratoplasty and epikeratophakia and in scarred corneas. Arch Ophthalmol. 1988;106(12):1697–1700. doi: 10.1001/archopht.1988.01060140869030
  18. Nakakura S. Icare® rebound tonometers: review of their characteristics and ease of use. Clin Ophthalmol. 2018;12:1245–1253. doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S163092
  19. Billy A, David PE, Mahabir AK, et al. Utility of the Tono-Pen in measuring intraocular pressure in Trinidad: a cross-sectional study. West Indian Med J. 2015;64(4):367–371. doi: 10.7727/wimj.2014.125
  20. Levy Y, Zadok D, Glovinsky Y, et al. Tono-Pen versus Goldmann tonometry after excimer laser photorefractive keratectomy. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1999;25(4):486–491. doi: 10.1016/s0886-3350(99)80044-3
  21. Neuburger M, Maier P, Böhringer D, et al. The impact of corneal edema on intraocular pressure measurements using Goldmann applanation tonometry, Tono-Pen XL, iCare, and ORA: an in vitro model. J Glaucoma. 2013;22(7):584–590. doi: 10.1097/IJG.0b013e31824cef11
  22. Moon CH, Choi KS, Rhee MR, Lee SJ. Intraoperative assessment of intraocular pressure in vitrectomized air-filled and fluid-filled eyes. Acta Ophthalmol. 2013;91(7): e524–e528. doi: 10.1111/aos.12145
  23. Doering CJ, Feldman E, Bdolah-Abram T, et al. Mathematical discrepancies of the Tono-Pen applanation tonometer. J Glaucoma. 2017;26(2): e30–e36. doi: 10.1097/IJG.0000000000000524
  24. Horowitz GS, Byles J, Lee J, D’Este C. Comparison of the Tono-Pen and Goldmann tonometer for measuring intraocular pressure in patients with glaucoma. Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2004;32(6):584–589. doi: 10.1111/j.1442-9071.2004.00907.x
  25. Bhartiya S, Bhargav S, Sethi S, Mohan S. Tonopen: A critical Appraisal. Glaucoma. 2009;14(7):73–76.
  26. Gloor BRP. Hans Goldmann (1899–1991). Eur J Ophthalmol. 2010;20(1):1–11. doi: 10.1177/112067211002000101
  27. Kumar N, Jivan S. Goldmann applanation tonometer calibration error checks: current practice in the UK. Eye. 2007;21(6):733–734. doi: 10.1038/sj.eye.6702316
  28. Gazzard G, Jayaram H, Roldan AM, Friedman DS. When gold standards change: time to move on from Goldmann tonometry? Br J Ophthalmol. 2021;105(1):1–2. doi: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2020-317112
  29. Shah MA, Bin Saleem K, Mehmood T. Intraocular pressure measurement: Goldmann applanation tonometer vs non contact airpuff tonometer. J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad. 2012;24(3–4):21–24. PMID: 24669600.
  30. Kass MA. Standardizing the measurement of intraocular pressure for clinical research. Guidelines from the Eye Care Technology Forum. Ophthalmology. 1996;103(1):183–185. doi: 10.1016/s0161-6420(96)30741-0
  31. Chandra A, Barsam A, Hammond CJ. Tonometer prism sterilisation: a local and UK national survey. Cont Lens Anterior Eye. 2008;31(1):13–16. doi: 10.1016/j.clae.2007.07.004
  32. Ragan A, Cote SL, Huang JT. Disinfection of the Goldman applanation tonometer: a systematic review. Can J Ophthalmol. 2018;53(3):252–259. doi: 10.1016/j.jcjo.2017.09.013
  33. Sandhu SS, Chattopadhyay S, Birch MK, Ray-Chaudhuri N. Frequency of Goldmann applanation tonometer calibration error checks. J Glaucoma. 2005;14(3):215–218. doi: 10.1097/00061198-200506000-00009
  34. Choudhari NS, Moorthy PK, Tungikar VB, et al. Rectifying calibration error of Goldmann applanation tonometer is easy! Indian J Ophthalmol. 2014;62(11):1082–1085. doi: 10.4103/0301-4738.146761
  35. Rüfer F. Sources of error in Goldmann applanation tonometry. Ophthalmologe. 2011;108(6):546–552. (In German) doi: 10.1007/s00347-011-2370-5
  36. Jethani J, Dave P, Jethani M, et al. The applicability of correction factor for corneal thickness on non-contact tonometer measured intraocular pressure in LASIK treated eyes. Saudi J Ophthalmol. 2016;30(1):25–28. doi: 10.1016/j.sjopt.2015.11.001
  37. Kiddee W, Tanjana A. Variations of intraocular pressure measured by Goldmann applanation tonometer, Tono-Pen, iCare Rebound tonometer, and Pascal dynamic contour tonometer in patients with corneal edema after phacoemulsification. J Glaucoma. 2021;30(4):317–324. doi: 10.1097/IJG.0000000000001725
  38. Blodi CF. Edward S Perkins, MD, PhD (1919–2015): In the vanguard of ophthalmic physician-scientists. J Med Biogr. 2021;6:9677720211030267. doi: 10.1177/09677720211030267
  39. Aziz K, Friedman DS. Tonometers-which one should I use? Eye. 2018;32(5):931–937. doi: 10.1038/s41433-018-0040-4
  40. Ohanesian R.V., Shahsuvaryan M.L. Eye Diseases. 2005. Vol. 16. P. 16.
  41. Gupta N, Aun T, Kongdon N, et al. Rukovodstvo po lecheniyu glaukomy Mezhdunarodnogo soveta po oftal’mologii. 2016. 29 p. (In Russ.)
  42. Vurdaft AE. On the precision of polyak measuring scales in Maklakov tonometry. National Journal glaucoma. 2017;16(4):11–22. (In Russ.)
  43. Astakhov YS, Akopov EL, Potyomkin VV. Аpplanation and dynamic contour tonometry: a comparative analysis. Ophthalmology Journal. 2008;1(1):4–10. (In Russ.)
  44. Bauer SM, Venatovskaya LA, Avershina LA, Pikusova SM. Elastotonometry for evaluation of biomechanical characteristics of the eye after surgical hyperopia correction. The Russian annals of ophthalmology. 2020;136(5):32–38. (In Russ.) doi: 10.17116/oftalma202013605132
  45. Dorofeev DA, Pozdeeva OG, Ekgardt VF, et al. Ophthalmotonometric indicators measured by Maklakov applanation tonometer and rebound tonometer. Reflection. 2018;(2):27–32. (In Russ.) doi: 10.25276/2686-6986-2018-2-27-32
  46. Rozhko YuI. Glaznoe davlenie: tonometricheskie i tonograficheskie metody issledovaniya. Uchebno-metodicheskoe posobie po oftal’mologii dlya studentov 4–6 kursov vsekh fakul’tetov, klinicheskikh ordinatorov i aspirantov meditsinskikh vuzov. Gomel: GomGMU, 2013. 36 p. (In Russ.)
  47. Moiseeva IN, Stein AA. The effect of spatial inhomogeneity of the cornea on the deformation properties of the eyeball and the results of Maklakoff applanation tonometry. Biophysics. 2017;62:984–993. doi: 10.1134/S0006350917060173
  48. Astakhov YuS, Akopov YeL, Potemkin VV. Comparative characteristics of current tonometric methods. The Russian annals of ophthalmology. 2008;124(5):11–14. (In Russ.)
  49. West CE, Capella JA, Kaufman HE. Measurement of intraocular pressure with a pneumatic applanation tonometer. Am J Ophthalmol. 1972;74(3):505–509. doi: 10.1016/0002-9394(72)90917-8
  50. Zadok D, Tran DB, Twa M, et al. Pneumotonometry versus Goldmann tonometry after laser in situ keratomileusis for myopia. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1999;25(10):1344–1348. doi: 10.1016/s0886-3350(99)00202-3
  51. Abbasoglu OE, Bowman RW, Cavanagh HD, McCulley JP. Reliability of intraocular pressure measurements after myopic excimer photorefractive keratectomy. Ophthalmology. 1998;105(12): 2193–2196. doi: 10.1016/S0161-6420(98)91215-5
  52. Silver DM, Farrell RA. Validity of pulsatile ocular blood flow measurements. Surv Ophthalmol. 1994;38(Suppl):S72–S80. doi: 10.1016/0039-6257(94)90049-3
  53. Esgin H, Alimgil ML, Erda S. Clinical comparison of the ocular blood flow tonograph and the Goldmann applanation tonometer. Eur J Ophthalmol. 1998;8(3):162–166. doi: 10.1177/112067219800800308
  54. Spraul CW, Lang GE, Ronzani M, et al. Reproducibility of measurements with a new slit lamp-mounted ocular blood flow tonograph. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 1998;236(4):274–279. doi: 10.1007/s004170050077
  55. Eklund A, Hallberg P, Lindén C, Lindahl OA. An applanation resonator sensor for measuring intraocular pressure using combined continuous force and area measurement. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2003;44(7):3017–3024. doi: 10.1167/iovs.02-1116
  56. Jóhannesson G, Hallberg P, Eklund A, Lindén C. Introduction and clinical evaluation of servo-controlled applanation resonance tonometry. Acta Ophthalmol. 2012;90(7):677–682. doi: 10.1111/j.1755-3768.2011.02111.x
  57. Hallberg P, Eklund A, Bäcklund T, Lindén C. Clinical evaluation of applanation resonance tonometry: a comparison with Goldmann applanation tonometry. J Glaucoma. 2007;16(1):88–93. doi: 10.1097/01.ijg.0000243468.28590.8e
  58. Ottobelli L, Fogagnolo P, Frezzotti P, et al. Repeatability and reproducibility of applanation resonance tonometry: a cross-sectional study. BMC Ophthalmol. 2015;15:36. doi: 10.1186/s12886-015-0028-9
  59. Grolman B. A new tonometer system. Am J Optom Arch Am Acad Optom. 1972;49(8):646–660. doi: 10.1097/00006324-197208000-00005
  60. Ing E, Zhang A, Michaelov E, Wang W. Comparison of dynamic contour tonometry and non-contact tonometry in older patients presenting with headache or vision loss. Open Ophthalmol J. 2018;12:104–109. doi: 10.2174/1874364101812010104
  61. Vernon SA. Non-contact tonometry in the postoperative eye. Br J Ophthalmol. 1989;73(4):247–249. doi: 10.1136/bjo.73.4.247
  62. Moseley MJ. Non-contact tonometry. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 1995;15(S2): S35–S37. doi: 10.1046/j.1475-1313.1995.0150s2S35.x
  63. Luce DA. Determining in vivo biomechanical properties of the cornea with an ocular response analyzer. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2005;31(1):156–162. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2004.10.044
  64. Kynigopoulos M, Schlote T, Kotecha A, et al. Repeatability of intraocular pressure and corneal biomechanical properties measurements by the ocular response analyser. Klin Monbl Augenheilkd. 2008;225(5):357–360. doi: 10.1055/s-2008-1027256
  65. Bao F, Huang W, Zhu R, et al. Effectiveness of the Goldmann applanation tonometer, the dynamic contour tonometer, the ocular response analyzer and the Corvis ST in measuring intraocular pressure following FS-LASIK. Curr Eye Res. 2020;45(2):144–152. doi: 10.1080/02713683.2019.1660794
  66. Atkinson PL, Wishart PK, James JN, et al. Deterioration in the accuracy of the pulsair non-contact tonometer with use: need for regular calibration. Eye. 1992;6(Pt 5):530–534. doi: 10.1038/eye.1992.112
  67. Britt JM, Clifton BC, Barnebey HS, Mills RP. Microaerosol formation in noncontact ‘air-puff’ tonometry. Arch Ophthalmol. 1991;109(2):225–228. doi: 10.1001/archopht.1991.01080020071046
  68. Almazyad EM, Ameen S, Khan MA, Malik R. Guidelines and recommendations for tonometry use during the COVID-19 Era. Middle East Afr J Ophthalmol. 2020;27(2):73–78. doi: 10.4103/meajo.MEAJO_237_20
  69. Stock RA, Ströher C, Sampaio RR, et al. A Comparative study between the Goldmann applanation tonometer and the non-contact air-puff tonometer (Huvitz HNT 7000) in normal eyes. Clin Ophthalmol. 2021;15:445–451. doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S294710
  70. Demirci G, Erdur SK, Tanriverdi C, et al. Comparison of rebound tonometry and non-contact airpuff tonometry to Goldmann applanation tonometry. Ther Adv Ophthalmol. 2019;11:2515841419835731. doi: 10.1177/2515841419835731
  71. Kyei S, Assiamah F, Kwarteng MA, Gboglu CP. The association of central corneal thickness and intraocular pressure measures by non-con tact tonometry and Goldmann applanation tonometry among glaucoma patients. Ethiop J Health Sci. 2020;30(6):999–1004. doi: 10.4314/ejhs.v30i6.18
  72. Salouti R, Alishiri AA, Gharebaghi R, et al. Comparison among Ocular Response Analyzer, Corvis ST and Goldmann applanation tonometry in healthy children. Int J Ophthalmol. 2018;11(8):1330–1336. doi: 10.18240/ijo.2018.08.13
  73. Kaufmann C, Bachmann LM, Thiel MA. Intraocular pressure measurements using dynamic contour tonometry after laser in situ keratomileusis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2003;44(9):3790–3794. doi: 10.1167/iovs.02-0946
  74. Kniestedt C, Kanngiesser HE. Dynamische Konturtonometrie. Ophthalmologe. 2006;103(8):713–721. doi: 10.1007/s00347-006-1387-7
  75. Punjabi OS, Kniestedt C, Stamper RL, Lin SC. Dynamic contour tonometry: principle and use. Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2006;34(9): 837–840. doi: 10.1111/j.1442-9071.2006.01389.x
  76. Kamppeter BA, Jonas JB. Dynamic contour tonometry for intraocular pressure measurement. Am J Ophthalmol. 2005;140(2): 318–320. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2005.01.039
  77. Duba I, Wirthlin AC. Dynamic contour tonometry for post-LASIK intraocular pressure measurements. Klin Monbl Augenheilkd. 2004;221(5):347–350. doi: 10.1055/s-2004-812895
  78. Kaufmann C, Bachmann LM, Thiel MA. Comparison of dynamic contour tonometry with goldmann applanation tonometry. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2004;45(9):3118–3121. doi: 10.1167/iovs.04-0018
  79. Lam AK, Tse JS. Dynamic contour tonometry over silicone hydrogel contact lens. J Optom. 2014;7(2):91–99. doi: 10.1016/j.optom.2013.07.005
  80. Kanngiesser HE, Nee M, Kniestedt C, et al. Simulation of dynamic contour tonometry compared to in vitro study revealing minimal influence of corneal radius and astigmatism. The theoretical foundations of dynamic contour tonometry. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2003;44:2641.
  81. Kniestedt C, Nee M, Stamper RL. Accuracy of dynamic contour tonometry compared with applanation tonometry in human cadaver eyes of different hydration states. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2005;243(4):359–366. doi: 10.1007/s00417-004-1024-6
  82. Bäurle S, Viestenz A, Seitz B, Viestenz A. Intraocular pressure elevation after vitrectomy-Goldmann applanation tonometry measures lower intraocular pressure than dynamic contour tonometry. Ophthalmologe. 2022;119(S1):71–76. (In German) doi: 10.1007/s00347-021-01443-z
  83. Bochmann F, Kaufmann C, Thiel MA. Dynamic contour tonometry versus Goldmann applanation tonometry: challenging the gold standard. Expert Rev Ophthalmol. 2010;5(6):743–749. doi: 10.1586/eop.10.68
  84. Twa MD, Roberts CJ, Karol HJ, et al. Evaluation of a contact lens-embedded sensor for intraocular pressure measurement. J Glaucoma. 2010;19(6):382–390. doi: 10.1097/IJG.0b013e3181c4ac3d
  85. Mansouri K, Shaarawy T. Continuous intraocular pressure monitoring with a wireless ocular telemetry sensor: initial clinical experience in patients with open angle glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol. 2011;95(5):627–629. doi: 10.1136/bjo.2010.192922
  86. Mansouri K, Weinreb RN, Liu JH. Efficacy of a contact lens sensor for monitoring 24-h intraocular pressure related patterns. PLoS One. 2015;10(5): e0125530. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0125530
  87. Kim YW, Kim JS, Lee SY, et al. Twenty-four-hour intraocular pressure-related patterns from contact lens sensors in normal-tension glaucoma and healthy eyes: the exploring nyctohemeral intraocular pressure related pattern for glaucoma management (ENIGMA) study. Ophthalmology. 2020;127(11):1487–1497. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2020.05.010
  88. Mansouri K. The road ahead to continuous 24-hour intraocular pressure monitoring in glaucoma. J Ophthalmic Vis Res. 2014;9(2):260–268.
  89. Lorenz K, Korb C, Herzog N, et al. Tolerability of 24-hour intraocular pressure monitoring of a pressure-sensitive contact lens. J Glaucoma. 2013;22(4):311–316. doi: 10.1097/IJG.0b013e318241b874
  90. Holló G, Kóthy P, Vargha P. Evaluation of continuous 24-hour intraocular pressure monitoring for assessment of prostaglandin-induced pressure reduction in glaucoma. J Glaucoma. 2014;23(1): e6–e12. doi: 10.1097/IJG.0b013e31829e5635
  91. Mottet B, Aptel F, Romanet JP, et al. 24-hour intraocular pressure rhythm in young healthy subjects evaluated with continuous monitoring using a contact lens sensor. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2013;131(12):1507–1516. doi: 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2013.5297

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download
2. Fig. 1. Schiotz’s tonometer

Download (118KB)
Indexing metadata
3. Fig. 2. Icare tonometer

Download (27KB)
Indexing metadata
4. Fig. 3. Tono-Pen tonometer

Download (37KB)
Indexing metadata
5. Fig. 4. Goldmann tonometer

Download (60KB)
Indexing metadata
6. Fig. 5. Perkins tonometer

Download (40KB)
Indexing metadata
7. Fig. 6. Tonometry according to Maklakov

Download (40KB)
Indexing metadata
8. Fig. 7. Pneumotonometer

Download (35KB)
Indexing metadata
9. Fig. 8. Pulsatile Ocular Blood Flow (OBF) tonometer

Download (49KB)
Indexing metadata
10. Fig. 9. BioResonator ART tonometer

Download (43KB)
Indexing metadata
11. Fig. 10. Keeler Pulsair EasyEye tonometer

Download (33KB)
Indexing metadata
12. Fig. 11. Ocular response analyser (ORA)

Download (55KB)
Indexing metadata
13. Fig. 12. Corvis ST tonometer

Download (64KB)
Indexing metadata
14. Fig. 13. PASCAL tonometer

Download (29KB)
Indexing metadata
15. Fig. 14. Sensimed Triggerfish tonometer

Download (66KB)
Indexing metadata

Copyright (c) 2022 Samoylov A.N., Samoylova P.A., Ahmetov N.R., Usov V.A., Gainutdinova R.F., Zakirova G.Z.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
 


This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies