A Comparison of Applanation and Rebound Tonometers in Young Chicks

Lisa A Ostrin1, Christine F Wildsoet2

  • 1College of Optometry, University of Houston , Houston, Texas, USA.

Insights

This study compared applanation (Tono-Pen) and rebound (TonoLab) tonometry for measuring intraocular pressure (IOP) in chicks. TonoLab showed less variability, but both devices had age-dependent differences and deviated from manometry, highlighting the need for calibration.

Area of Science:

  • Ophthalmology
  • Veterinary Medicine
  • Biomedical Engineering

Background:

  • Intraocular pressure (IOP) measurement is crucial in animal models for ophthalmological research.
  • Applanation and rebound tonometry are common methods for IOP assessment.
  • Validating these methods in developing animal models is essential for accurate research outcomes.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate and compare the accuracy of applanation (Tono-Pen) and rebound (TonoLab) tonometry for measuring IOP in young, awake chicks.
  • To assess the intra-device and age-related variability of IOP readings from both tonometers.

Main Methods:

  • Weekly IOP measurements were taken in White Leghorn chicks (ages 3-45 days) using Tono-Pen and TonoLab.
  • Three repeated measurements per eye were performed to determine variance.
  • Calibration curves were generated using in situ manometry data (0-100 mmHg) at weekly intervals.

Main Results:

  • TonoLab exhibited lower within-measurement variability (CV 3.8-8.3%) compared to Tono-Pen (CV 11.0-19.7%).
  • TonoLab showed age-dependent increases in IOP readings (P < .001), unlike Tono-Pen.
  • Tono-Pen tended to underestimate IOP, while TonoLab overestimated it within the 20-60 mmHg range, with age-related differences noted for TonoLab.

Conclusions:

  • Both Tono-Pen and TonoLab demonstrated deviations from manometry in young chicks across tested ages.
  • These findings underscore the necessity of calibrating clinical tonometers when IOP is a critical variable in animal studies.
  • Accurate IOP assessment in avian models requires careful consideration of tonometer type and age-related calibration.
Abstract