ArticleInternational journal of ophthalmology2020
A pilot study of the precision of digital intraocular pressure measurement during vitrectomy.
Article in International journal of ophthalmology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo evaluate the precision of digital intraocular pressure (IOP) measurement in silicone oil (SO) filled eyes during vitrectomy.
methodsThis is a retrospective, single-blind study. Patients who were diagnosed with retinal detachment and scheduled for vitrectomy with SO injection were consecutively enrolled. During the vitrectomy, IOP was digitally measured and then by a rebound tonometer (IcarePRO). The rebound tonometer readings were masked to the surgeons. The digitally measured IOP and that of rebound tonometer were compared, and the inter-methods agreement was assessed. The absolute deviation in IOP values between these two methods (ΔIOP) was also calculated, and correlations between ΔIOP and refractive status, lens status and levels of surgeons' experience were analyzed.
resultsA total of 131 patients (131 eyes) were recruited, with a mean age of 51.0±16.1y. There was no significant difference in IOPs between digital measurement and the rebound tonometer (15.6±4.3
conclusionFor experienced surgeons, the digital IOP measurement may be an acceptable technique for IOP measurement in SO filled eyes during vitrectomy. However, its use by inexperienced surgeons should be taken with caution.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.