Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Accuracy of dog eye pressure tests with and without positioning system
By Cabble, Ava et al.·Published in Veterinary ophthalmology·2024·Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, United States·View original on PubMed →
PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →
Original publication title: Efficacy of the positioning system when measuring canine intraocular pressures with the Reichert® Tono-Vera® Vet rebound tonometer.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A group of Beagle-derived dogs, some with open-angle glaucoma, had their eye pressure measured using a special device called the Tono-Vera Vet tonometer. The study tested three different ways to take these measurements: using an automatic positioning system, using it for just one reading, and without it. The results showed that all three methods gave similar and reliable eye pressure readings. This means that even if the automatic positioning system isn't used, pet owners can still trust the eye pressure measurements taken with this device.
People also search for: dog eye pressure measurement · Beagle glaucoma treatment · Tono-Vera Vet tonometer reliability
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements in dogs taken with the Reichert® Tono-Vera® Vet rebound tonometer with and without the automatic positioning system. ANIMALS STUDIED: Measurements were taken on 49 eyes from 26 Beagle-derived dogs with variable genetics-four non-glaucomatous and 22 ADAMTS10-mutant dogs affected with different stages of open-angle glaucoma. Seventeen of the 26 dogs were measured 2-4 times on different days with variable intervals since IOP-lowering medications were administered. PROCEDURES: In each dog, tonometry was performed with the Tono-Vera® Vet using three different methods in a randomized order: (Method 1) Average of three readings with an automatic positioning system; (Method 2) one reading with an automatic positioning system; and (Method 3) average of three readings obtained without the automatic positioning system. Statistical analyses included one-way ANOVA, Tukey pairwise comparisons, and Bland-Altman plots (MiniTab®). RESULTS: With each of the three tonometry methods, 116 measurements were taken, resulting in 348 total IOP measurements with a range of 12.8-49.9 mmHg. The means and standard deviations for each method were 25.4 ± 6.9 mmHg (Method 1), 26.0 ± 7.2 mmHg (Method 2), and 26.9 ± 7.7 mmHg (Method 3), with no significant differences (p = .27). Mean IOP variances were also not significantly different between tonometry methods (p = .24 to .78). CONCLUSIONS: Because mean IOPs and their standard deviations were not statistically different between the three tonometry methods, we conclude that Tono-Vera® Vet measurements conducted without the aid of the positioning system still provide reliable results.
Find similar cases for your pet
PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.
Search related cases →Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37952123/