ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2026
Implementation and Clinical Application of 24-Hour Intraocular Pressure Monitoring in China: A Nationwide Survey.
Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2026. 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
Purpose: To evaluate the nationwide implementation and clinical application of 24-hour intraocular pressure (IOP) monitoring in China. Methods: A nationwide descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted from September 2024 to March 2025. Two structured questionnaires were distributed to 467 hospitals across China (400 valid responses) and 170 patients recruited from our institution who were undergoing 24-hour IOP monitoring for the first time. Collected data included implementation rates, tonometer types, measurement protocols, examiner consistency, and patient-reported perceptions. Results: Among the 400 responding hospitals, 261 (65.3%) had implemented 24-hour IOP monitoring; however, 85.1% managed fewer than 20 patients per month. The most common measurement frequencies within a 24-hour period were 12 (37.2%), 6 (32.6%), and 7 times (27.2%), respectively. Non-contact tonometer (NCT) was the predominant device for both daytime (67.8%) and nighttime (64.6%) measurements. Among the 175 hospitals performing nocturnal measurements, only 7.4% employed supine positioning. In 65.5% of institutions, 24-hour IOP measurements for individual patients were performed by multiple nurses. Regarding patient perceptions, 95.8% considered 24-hour IOP monitoring important, yet 52.9% expressed reluctance to undergo the repeated procedure, citing hospitalization inconvenience (80%), sleep disruption (28.9%), concerns about measurement accuracy (4.4%), and cost (4.4%). Conclusion: Although over half of the surveyed hospitals had implemented 24-hour IOP monitoring, overall clinical utilization remained suboptimal, with highly heterogeneous local protocols and considerable patient reluctance toward the current inpatient-based, nurse-dependent monitoring paradigm. Standardized implementation of national guidelines, enhanced patient education, and development of patient-centric, wearable IOP monitoring technologies are essential to optimize accessibility and support glaucoma management.
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.