The purpose of this investigation was to clinically compare the Topcon CT-10, Reichert XPERT NCT, Reichert NCT II, and Keeler PULSAIR air-puff tonometers to t he Goldmann applanation tonometer. Two hundred and twenty-seven subjects (452 eyes) ranging in age from 8 to 86 and presenting intraocular pressures from 6 to 40 mm Hg participated in the study. Mean lOP values for all air-puff tonometers, except the Reichert NCT II, were statistically significantly different from the Goldmann findings. The Topcon CT-10 read slightly higher in most pressure ranges, with the two Reichert instruments reading closest to and the Keeler PULSAIR reading lower than Goldmann in most pressure ranges. The differences were not considered clinically relevant. Subjects selected the XPERT NCT as the most preferred and the NCT II as the least preferred air-puff tonometer. The majority of the respondents attributed their selection to the intensity of the air puff. The new generation of air-puff tonometers offer distinctive design improvements, as well as increased patient comfort, but provide no greater reliability than the original NCT air-puff tonometer.
Files are restricted to Pacific University. Sign in to view.