Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 8, 2026
Trabecular Meshwork Response to Pressure Elevation in the Living Human Eye
Published on: June 20, 2015
Intraocular Pressure Measurement Variability Associated With Face Mask Use
Ortal Fogel Tempelhof1, Yael Reich2, Rony Rachmiel1
1Department of Ophthalmology, Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center (Affiliated to The Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Israel), Tel Aviv.
Prcis:
Masks have a multifactorial impact on intraocular pressure measured with the Goldmann tonometer, reaching clinical significance in one-third of patients. Before making clinical decisions, repeated measurements without a mask or other tonometers should be considered.
Purpose:
To investigate the impact of wearing face masks on intraocular pressure (IOP), the only manageable factor today in glaucoma, a blinding disease. Given the recurrent global outbreaks of respiratory infections (eg, COVID-19, RSV, and measles), mask use remains a crucial measure to reduce transmission.
Methods:
A prospective, randomized, controlled, and blinded clinical study. Adult patients without corneal pathologies or hypotony were recruited in the glaucoma clinic. Each patient underwent IOP measurements using the Goldmann applanation tonometer under 3 conditions: with a surgical mask, a KN95 mask, and without a mask as the control.
Results:
Forty-seven patients (94 eyes) with various types of glaucoma were enrolled. Past ocular history included an average of IOP-lowering medications of 1.7±1.5 (range 0-5), 25.5% had prior laser treatment for IOP control, and 19.1% had previously undergone glaucoma surgery. The mean difference in IOP readings between the masks ranged from 0 to 7.5 mm Hg with no statistical significance, P =0.116. No significant differences were found based on sex ( P =0.560), laterality ( P =0.384), number of IOP-lowering medications ( P =0.730), history of previous glaucoma laser treatment ( P =0.456), or surgery ( P =0.425). Sixteen patients (34.0%) exhibited an IOP difference of 3 mm Hg or more between the conditions, although not statistically significant ( P =0.546).
Conclusion:
Masks exert inconsistent effects on IOP measurements. In approximately one-third of patients, the differences reached clinical significance, although not statistically significant. These variations are presumably influenced by multiple factors, such as mask fit to facial structure, positioning, and alterations in breathing patterns while wearing masks.
