Comparison of transpalpebral tonometry with corneal-compensated intraocular pressure
https://doi.org/10.53432/2078-4104-2026-25-2-31-37
Abstract
PURPOSE. To evaluate the accuracy and repeatability of intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements using a transpalpebral tonometer compared to corneal-compensated intraocular pressure.
METHODS. The study included 50 healthy subjects and the same number of glaucoma patients. Transpalpebral measurements were performed using the Tonotest tonometer (AO Yelatomskiy priborniy zavod, Russia), cornealcompensated IOP was measured using the Ocular Response Analyzer (Reichert Inc., USA). Five consecutive transpalpebral measurements were obtained for each eye, followed by a repeat measurement after returning the device to its initial position.
RESULTS. The age of subjects in first group was (M±σ) 21.54±2.82 years; 21 men and 29 women. The age of the patients in the glaucoma group was 66.34±13.53 years; 17 men and 33 women.
When comparing transpalpebral measurements with corneal-compensated IOP using the Bland–Altman method, the mean measurement error (bias) was -0.36 mm Hg. The upper (ULOA) and lower (LLOA) limits of 95% agreement were +7.77 and –8.49 mm Hg, respectively. A significant (p<0.001) difference was also found between the measurement error in the group of healthy volunteers and patients with glaucoma. Comparison of the initial and repeated transpalpebral measurements demonstrated their good agreement. The mean bias was –0.64 mm Hg. ULOA and LLOA were +0.77 and –2.06 mm Hg, respectively.
Regression analysis of sequential transpalpebral measurements revealed a trend toward decreased results, with each subsequent measurement being, on average, 0.19 mm Hg lower than the previous one (confidence interval 0.02–0.38 mm Hg).
CONCLUSION. Transpalpebral tonometry is not a suitable replacement for corneal IOP measurement methods in the initial diagnosis of glaucoma due to substantial measurement error. However, despite these limitations, it is highly valuable for screening and follow-up due to its advantages, such as high repeatability, noninvasiveness, and technical simplicity.
About the Authors
М. Chtioui
Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
postgraduate student
8-2 Trubetskaya St., Moscow, 119991
J. V. Kosova
Krasnov Research Institute of Eye Diseases
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
junior researcher
11A Rossolimo St., Moscow, 119021
V. I. Siplivy
Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University ; Russian Scientific and Research Institute for Medical Engineering
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Cand. Sci. (Med.), Associate Professor, Expert
8-2 Trubetskaya St., Moscow, 119991
24-16 Kashirskoe highway, Moscow, 115478
V. V. Voytovich
Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
ophthalmologist
8-2 Trubetskaya St., Moscow, 119991
References
1. Brezhnev A.Yu., Egorov E.A., Erichev V.P. et al. Glaucoma "landscape" in Russia, CIS and Eastern European countries: what has changed over 15 years? RMJ Clinical Ophthalmology 2023; 23(2):73-79. https://doi.org/10.32364/2311-7729-2023-23-2-73-79.
2. Vaajanen A., Purola P., Ojamo M. et al. Changes in incidence and severity of visual impairment due to glaucoma during 40 years - a registerbased study in Finland. Acta Ophthalmol 2022; 100(5):534-540. https://doi.org/10.1111/aos.15030.
3. Avetisov SE, Erichev VP, Antonov AA, Poleva RP, Kozlova IV, Makarova AS. Modern achievements in the diagnosis and treatment of glaucoma. Vestnik oftal’mologii 2023; 139(3.2):96-106. https://doi.org/10.17116/oftalma202313903296
4. Illarionova A. R., Piletsky N. G. A study of the reliability of the testimony of the tonometer for measuring intraocular pressure through the eyelid (Diaton-01 PRA). RMJ Clinical Ophthalmology 2001; 2(2): 55-56.
5. Nesterov A.P., Illarionova A.R., Obruch B.V. New transpalpebral tonometer TGDC-01 Diaton. Vestnik oftal’mologii 2007;123(1):42-44.
6. Avetisov, S.E, Erichev V.P., Antonov A.A. Diagnostic capabilities of transpalpebral tonometry with the IGD-03 indicator. National journal glaucoma 2016; 15(3):17-23.
7. Alzuhairy S. Transpalpebral intraocular pressure measurement by Diaton compared to Goldman applanation tonometer in myopic eyes before and after transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy in Saudi Arabia. Int J Ophthalmol 2023; 16(3):375-381. https://doi.org/10.18240/ijo.2023.03.07.
8. Kobashi H. Evaluation of a new transpalpebral tonometer for selfmeasuring intraocular pressure. PLoS One 2024; 19(5):e0302568. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0302568.
9. Montolío-Marzo E, Morales-Fernández L, Saenz-Frances San Baldomero F, García-Saenz S, García-Feijoo J, Piñero DP, Martínez-de-laCasa JM. Easyton® transpalpebral versus Perkins applanation tonometry in different populations. Int Ophthalmol 2023; 43(10):3491-3497. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-023-02754-7.
10. Keller WJ, Haytac P, Nazarian T, Chawla K, Chang J. Transpalpebral measurement of intraocular pressure with the Tono-Pen XL, in a young, healthy, adult population. Medicine (Baltimore) 2025; 104(18):e42302. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000042302.
11. Chtioui М., Siplivy V.I., Kosova J.V., Aslamazova A.E. Devices for intraocular pressure self-tonometry. National journal glukoma 2025; 24(2):73-83. https://doi.org/10.53432/2078-4104-2025-24-2-73-83
Review
For citations:
Chtioui М., Kosova J.V., Siplivy V.I., Voytovich V.V. Comparison of transpalpebral tonometry with corneal-compensated intraocular pressure. National Journal glaucoma. 2026;25(2):31-37. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.53432/2078-4104-2026-25-2-31-37
Views:
101
JATS XML
Email this article 