Icare回弹式眼压计与Goldmann压平眼压计眼压测量结果的比较

背景Icare回弹式眼压计作为一种新式眼压计,有必要对它的临床应用价值进行评估。目的通过比较分析Icare回弹式眼压计和Goldmann压平眼压计（GAT）的眼压测量结果,探讨Icare的临床价值。方法可疑青光眼、青光眼、屈光不正及部分健康体检者78例共152眼同时接受Icare、GAT眼压测量,受检眼先行Icare测量,然后再进行GAT测量,2次测量间隔3～5min。对比分析两种眼压计的测量结果。结果使用Icare和GAT测得的眼压均值分别为（19．16±5．03）mmHg和（18．41±4．52）mmHg,96眼（63．2％）两者的眼压差值≤1mmHg,二者的测量值差异虽有统计学意义,但二者的变化呈明显正相关（r=0．940,P〈0．01）。当Icare眼压测量值〈16mmHg时,Icare的眼压测量值低于GAT,而当Icare眼压测量值≥16mmHg时恰好相反;CCT偏薄、正常以及偏厚的情况下,Icare的眼压测量值均高于GAT的眼压测量值。Icare、GAT的眼压测量值和CCT间呈正相关（r=0．341,P〈0．01;r=0．333,P〈0．01）。结论与GAT眼压计比较,Icare回弹式眼压计易操作,测量结果可靠,临床实用性更强。     

三种不同眼压计眼压测量值的比较

目的:比较分析Icare回弹式眼压计、GAT和DCT的眼压测量结果,探讨Icare回弹式眼压计的临床性能。方法:78例152眼分别用Icare,GAT,DCT3种眼压计进行眼压测量,然后根据测得的眼压高低分为高眼压、中眼压、低眼压3个组,对比分析3种眼压计的测量结果。结果:在全部受测者中Icare,GAT,DCT测得的眼压均值分别为19.16±5.03mmHg,18.41±4.52mmHg和17.23±3.69mmHg,每两种眼压计相比均有显著差别,但是彼此之间密切相关。高、中、低3个眼压组两种眼压计之间的差值均随着眼压的增高而增大。结论:使用Icare测量的眼压值准确可信,Icare,GAT和DCT的眼压值彼此之间具有良好的相关性。     

中央角膜厚度对3种眼压计眼压测量值的影响

目的比较分析不同中央角膜厚度(central corneal thickness,CCT)下Icare回弹式眼压计、Goldmann压平式眼压计(Goldmann applanation tonometer,GAT)和动态轮廓眼压计(dynamic contour tonometry,DCT)的眼压测量结果,探讨CCT对3种眼压计测量值的影响。方法 对78例患者152眼分别用Icare、GAT、DCT3种眼压计进行眼压测量,并进行CCT的测量,对比不同CCT下3种眼压计的测量结果,分析眼压测量值与CCT的关系。结果 在全部受测者中Icare、GAT、DCT测得的眼压均值分别为(19.16±5.03)mmHg(1 kPa=7.5 mmHg)、(18.41±4.52)mmHg和(17.23±3.69)mmHg,三者之间有显著差异(F=7.256,P=0.001)。Icare和GAT的眼压测量值均与CCT显著相关(r=0.341,P<0.001;r=0.333,P<0.001),CCT每改变10μm,Icare的眼压值改变0.47 mmHg,GAT的眼压值改变0.41 mmHg;而DCT的眼压测量值与CCT无显著相关(r=0.032,P=0.699)。结论 Icare、GAT的眼压测量值均明显受CCT的影响,而Icare受CCT影响的程度较GAT的稍大,DCT的眼压测量值基本不受CCT的影响。     

药物治疗中的青光眼患者自我监测24小时眼压的临床效果

目的：评估自我监测24 h眼压在药物治疗原发性开角型青光眼（POAG）患者中的临床效果。方法： 系列病例研究。选取2017年8月至2019年1月就诊于沈阳爱尔眼视光医院行药物治疗且随访眼压控制良 好的POAG患者42例（73眼）,根据基线眼压分为A组：眼压为（12.86±1.40）mmHg（1 mmHg=0.133 kPa）; B组：眼压为（17.82±1.40）mmHg。入组患者通过iCare HOME回弹式眼压计使用培训认证后于家中 自行测量24 h眼压,自730起每隔2 h测量1次,夜间2330-530测量苏醒后即刻的坐位眼压。比 较组间各时间段眼压均值、峰值及波动值,并统计眼压峰值时间点和更改治疗方案的患者比例。数 据采用单因素方差分析、Kruskal-Wallis H检验、t检验以及χ2 检验进行分析。结果：入组患者随访、 门诊时间以及24 h的平均眼压总体差异无统计学意义（F=1.314,P=0.271）。入组患者24 h眼压峰值高 于门诊时间的眼压峰值、随访眼压峰值（H=-40.979、-51.363,均P<0.001）。83.6%的患者眼压峰值 出现在非门诊时间（A组86.5%、B组80.6%）,尤其是发生在夜间睡眠时间,其比例高达67.1%（A组 64.9%、B组69.4%）。入组患者以及A、B亚组患者的24 h眼压波动值均高于其门诊时间眼压波动 值（t=11.166、8.110、7.929,均P<0.001）,其中63.0%的患者24 h眼压波动值≥8 mmHg（A组51.4%、 B组75.0%）。根据自我监测24 h的眼压结果,49.3%的患者更改治疗方案,且B组患者更改比例（63.9%） 高于A组（35.1%）,差异有统计学意义（χ2 =6.035,P=0.014）。结论：药物治疗中的POAG患者自行监测 24 h眼压,能发现临床常规随访中无法监测到的眼压峰值和波动值,可作为医师评价疗效和调整治疗 方案的重要依据。     

五种眼压计测量眼压的一致性比较及其与角膜生物力学的相关性

目的 比较非接触眼压计（气流眼压）、Goldmann压平眼压计（压平眼压）、Icare pro回弹眼压计（回弹眼压）、Tono-pen AVIA眼压计（笔式眼压）和可视化角膜生物力学分析仪（生物力学眼压）测量眼压的一致性,进一步分析眼压和角膜生物力学的相关性。设计 诊断方法评价。研究对象 健康志愿者44例。方法 同一医师每天同一时段分别应用上述五种眼压计测量受试者的左眼眼压。将眼压与中央角膜厚度、角膜第一压平时间进行Pearson相关分析。主要指标 眼压值、眼压差值的平均值、相关系数。结果 压平眼压、气流眼压、回弹眼压、笔式眼压和生物力学眼压5种眼压结果分别为（15.9±3.3）mmHg、（14.8±2.9）mmHg、（16.9±3.3）mmHg、（14.7±2.5）mmHg和（16.1±3.0）mmHg。其中,气流眼压、笔式眼压较压平眼压低（P=0.01,0.00）。气流眼压、回弹眼压、笔式眼压、生物力学眼压均与压平眼压正相关（r=0.63、0.37、0.63、0.55,P均＜0.05）;Bland-Altman分析两种测量方式眼压差值平均值分别为：气流眼压与压平眼压：-1.1 mmHg [95%一致性界限（95% LoA）为-6.4,4.2],笔式眼压与压平眼压：-1.2 mmHg（95% LoA -6.3,3.9）,回弹眼压与压平眼压：1.0 mmHg（95% LoA为-6.2,8.3）,生物力学眼压与压平眼压：0.3 mmHg（95% LoA为-5.6,6.2）。所有研究对象中央角膜厚度（550.5±29.2）μm,角膜第一压平时间（7.63±0.36）ms。笔式眼压和中央角膜厚度呈正相关（r=0.40,P=0.01）。五种测试的眼压均与角膜第一压平时间呈正相关（r=0.53,0.64,0.55,0.46,0.99;P均＜0.05）。结论 Icare pro和Corvis ST测量眼压与Goldmann眼压计无明显差异,气流眼压、笔式眼压较压平眼压略低,Corvis ST与Goldmann眼压一致性最好。角膜第一压平时间是影响眼压测量结果的重要因素,时间越长,眼压测量值越高。（眼科, 2020, 29： 365-369）     

四种前列腺素类药物的降眼压疗效和耐受性对比研究

目的　探讨四种前列腺素类药物治疗原发性开角型青光眼（primary open-angle glaucoma，POAG）的疗效和耐受性差异。方法　采用随机平行试验，64例(128眼)POAG患者随机分成4组，分别使用贝美前列素(贝美前列素组)、拉坦前列素（拉坦前列素组）、曲伏前列素（曲伏前列素组）和他氟前列素（他氟前列素组）滴眼液治疗，观察并比较4组患者用药前和用药后1个月、3个月和6个月的眼压、眼部检查和眼表疾病指数（ocular surface disease index，OSDI）评分。结果　贝美前列素组用药前眼压为（26.1±6.2）mmHg（1 kPa=7.5 mmHg），用药后1个月、3个月和6个月眼压分别为（17.1±3.4）mmHg、（15.6±4.2）mmHg、（15.5±2.9）mmHg，与用药前比较，差异均有统计学意义（t=17.408、13.016、12.352，均为P＜0.001）。拉坦前列素组用药前眼压为（24.7±2.4）mmHg，用药后1个月、3个月和6个月眼压分别为（16.3±3.0）mmHg、（17.0±3.8）mmHg、（17.4±2.6）mmHg，与用药前比较，差异均有统计学意义（t=12.238、13.365、16.140，均为P＜0.001）。曲伏前列素组用药前眼压为（24.4±1.9）mmHg，用药后1个月、3个月和6个月眼压分别为（16.3±2.0）mmHg、（17.4±1.3）mmHg、（14.9±1.1）mmHg，与用药前比较，差异均有统计学意义（t=12.109、14.451、11.732，均为P＜0.001）。他氟前列素组用药前眼压为（25.2±2.3）mmHg，用药后1个月、3个月和6个月眼压分别为（17.2±3.1）mmHg、（17.0±2.1）mmHg、（18.1±2.4）mmHg，与用药前比较，差异均有统计学意义（t=10.540、16.129、14.006，均为P＜0.001）。拉坦前列素组患者睫毛增长和虹膜变色的发生率最高，4组患者的结膜充血和角膜炎的发生率相似。用药6个月后患者的OSDI评分贝美前列素组（21.8±11.1）分、拉坦前列素组（32.1±24.1）分、曲伏前列素组（10.7±5.7）分、他氟前列素组（25.6±6.3）分，曲伏前列素组患者的OSDI评分显著低于其他3组，差异均有统计学意义（均为P＜0.05）。结论　四种前列腺素类药物均能显著降低POAG患者眼压，曲伏前列素耐受性较好，拉坦前列素的耐受性最差。     

高眼压症及原发性开角型青光眼患者的24 h眼压波动规律

目的 通过24 h眼压测量来深入分析对比高眼压症与原发性开角型青光眼(POAG)患者的眼压曲线特征。方法 收集2016年1月~2019年3月在我科门诊诊断为高眼压症的患者52例(104眼)及POAG尚未接受降眼压治疗的患者38例(76眼)。入院后行24 h眼压检查,用非接触性眼压计从早9时起每隔2 h测量眼压1次,至次日7时结束。分析2组患者的平均眼压,峰值眼压及时间点,谷值眼压及时间点,昼夜眼压波动及双眼眼压压差值及其分布情况,比较2组眼压波动的异同点。结果 104眼高眼压症患者的平均眼压为(18.73±1.71)mmHg(1 mmHg=0.133 kPa),平均峰值眼压为(22.36±2.40) mmHg,平均谷值眼压为(15.63±2.09) mmHg,平均昼夜眼压波动为(6.72±2.24) mmHg。76眼POAG患者的平均眼压为(20.65±2.53) mmHg,平均峰值眼压为(25.78±2.81) mmHg,平均谷值眼压为(17.45±2.54) mmHg,平均昼夜眼压波动为(8.34±2.37) mmHg。2组的峰值及谷值眼压值分布最多的时间点均为凌晨3时及夜晚21时,大部分患者的峰值眼压时间点在门诊时间之外。高眼压症组中昼夜眼压波动位于5~8 mmHg的占比最大,为54.81%(57/104),POAG组中昼夜眼压波动>8 mmHg的占比最大,为53.95%(41/76)。高眼压症组中,16例患者经24 h眼压检查后监测到眼压波动异常,占比为30.77%(16/52);POAG组中经24 h眼压检查后有29例患者可以监测到眼压波动异常,占比为76.32%(29/38)。结论 24 h眼压监测中,POAG患者较高眼压症患者的平均眼压、峰值眼压、谷值眼压、昼夜眼压波动及双眼压差均有增加。对于24 h眼压发现眼压波动较大的高眼压症患者应在后续加强密切随访,而对于POAG患者24 h眼压监测可在治疗前提供眼压的基线水平,为后续治疗提供参考及评估依据,因此建议将24 h眼压作为高眼压症及POAG的常规检查手段。     

正常眼压性青光眼、原发性开角型青光眼患者及正常人DCT眼压及OPA的比较性研究

目的探讨在原发性开角型青光眼(PrimaryOpenAngleGlaucoma,POAG)及正常眼压性青光眼(NormalTensionGlaucoma,NTG)患者使用动态轮廓眼压计(DynamicContourTonometer,DCT)测量时的影响因素。方法POAG、NTG及正常对照组各31例,测量了Goldmann压平眼压(GoldmannApplanationTonometer,GAT)、DCT眼压、眼脉动幅度值(OcularPulseAmplitude,OPA)、以及心率(HeartRate,HR)、收缩压(SystolicBloodPressure,SBP)、舒张压(DiastolicBloodPressure,DBP)等指标,评估GAT、DCT两种眼压计测量的一致性,分析测量中的影响因素,并比较三组被检者OPA的差异;结果除HR以外(P=0.130),三组被检者的DCT眼压、OPA、GAT眼压、HR、SBP及DBP均存在显著性差异(P<0.05)。其中,正常对照组OPA为(2.85±1.15)mmHg,NTG组为(1.99±1.04)mmHg,POAG组为(3.00±1.07)mmHg,POAG组与正常对照组比较差异(P=0.568)无显著性意义,与NTG组比较差异有显著性意义(P<0.001),NTG组与正常对照组(P=0.003)比较有显著性意义;结论DCT眼压和GAT眼压表现出良好的一致性,DCT的测量结果可信;POAG、NTG患者和正常人的OPA存在差异。     

国产回弹式眼压计在儿童眼压测量中的应用

目的：观察国产回弹式眼压计在儿童眼压监测中的应用。方法：对本院眼视光门诊就诊的108例儿童进行两眼眼压测量,年龄大于13岁的儿童回弹式眼压计（ rebound tonometer,RBT）测量完成后左眼进行Goldmann压平式眼压计（ Goldmann applanation tonometry,GAT）眼压测量。 结果：两眼均顺利完成RBT眼压测量的儿童100例,成功率92.6%（100/108）,其中13岁以上24例。24例左眼RBT和GAT眼压平均值分别为16.0±3.0 mmHg （1 kPa=7.5mmHg）和15.7±2.8mmHg,两者差异无统计学意义（P〉0.05）,两者具有良好的相关性（r=0.849,P〈0.05）。100例儿童的左右眼眼压均呈正态分布,平均值分别为16.0±2.8mmHg和16.2±2.6mmHg,两者差异无统计学意义（P〉0.05）,两者具有良好的相关性（r=0.863,P〈0.05）。 结论：国产回弹式眼压计在儿童眼压测量中简单易操作,无需麻醉,准确性较高,能够较好满足临床儿童眼压测量的需求。     

曲伏前列素与布林佐胺治疗开角型青光眼或高眼压症的临床研究

目的:研究曲伏前列素与布林佐胺联合治疗原发性开角型青光眼(primary open angle glaucoma,POAG)、高眼压症(ocular hypertension,OHT)及抗青光眼术后高眼压的降眼压疗效及安全性。方法:将48例52眼POAG,OHT,抗青光眼术后高眼压的患者纳入为期2mo的前瞻性、单向性、开放性研究。经药物洗脱期测量眼压基线值。用药后2,4,8,12wk测量眼压、视力、视野,观察眼部症状、体征及全身副作用。计算12wk时眼压≤17mmHg患者百分比。结果:患者基线眼压28.08±2.50mmHg,4次随访眼压(17.12±1.42,16.71±1.55,16.13±1.52,16.12±1.49)mmHg,眼压下降均值10.35mmHg,最大下降率45%。用药后眼压与基线眼压比较差值有非常显著意义(P<0.01),用药12wk时,眼压≤17mmHg的患者占64%。常见的不良反应是结膜充血,偶见轻微烧灼感,轻度味觉异常等,对角膜、泪膜、视力、视野、血压、心率均未影响。结论:曲伏前列素与布林佐胺联合应用降眼压的效果明显,安全性好。联合用药,眼压≤17mmHg患者所占百分比显著。     

Intraocular pressure and ocular pulse amplitude comparisons in different types of glaucoma using dynamic contour tonometry

PURPOSE: To compare the intraocular pressures (IOP) and ocular pulse amplitudes (OPA) in patients with different types of glaucoma, ocular hypertension (OHT), and normal controls (NC) using dynamic contour tonometry (DCT) and the goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT). METHODS: 906 eyes of 501 adult patients in the following five groups were included in this cross-sectional study: primary open angle glaucoma (POAG), normal tension glaucoma (NTG), Pseudoexfoliative Glaucoma (PXG), OHT, and NC. The following tests were performed simultaneously during a single visit: IOP using DCT and GAT; OPA using DCT and central corneal thickness (CCT) using ultrasound pachymetry. Mixed effects regression models were used to compare the DCT and GAT IOP measurements in the five groups; the effect of CCT on IOP and the relationship between OPA and IOP within each group. RESULTS: DCT consistently had higher IOP values than GAT in POAG, PXG, NTG, and controls (p < 0.001) but not in OHT (p = 0.84). DCT IOP did not change while GAT IOP showed a non-significant increase (p = 0.09) with increased corneal thickness in each group. OPA was found to be highest in OHT (3.61 mmHg) and lowest in the control group (2.86 mmHg) and significantly increased with IOP in all groups. CONCLUSIONS: DCT measures an IOP that is significantly higher than GAT IOP in glaucoma and control subjects but not in ocular hypertensives. Furthermore, the DCT may measure an IOP that is independent of the CCT, which may not be true for the GAT, which increases with the CCT. OPA was highest in OHT and may be affected by the IOP.     

动态轮廓眼压计的临床应用

目的 探讨动态轮廓眼压计(OCT)在原发性开角型青光眼(POAG)、高眼压症(OHT)、正常眼压性青光眼(NTG)及正常对照人群眼压和眼压脉动振幅(OPA)测量中的临床应用价值及影响因素.方法 选取POAG、OHT、NTG及正常对照组各30例,分别采用Goldmann压平眼压计(GAT)测量眼压,DCT测量眼压及OPA,并测量中央角膜厚度(CCT)、中央角膜曲率(CCV)以及心率、收缩压、舒张压等指标,以了解这些指标对OPA的影响.各组统计量两两比较采用q检验.各统计量之间的相关分析采用Pearson相关分析,对于多个变量之间的线性关系采用多重线性回归分析.结果 DCT测量POAG、OHT、NTG及对照组的眼压值分别为(21.68±2.02)、(23.37±2.65)、(18.43±3.08)、(17.04±2.07)lnln Hg(1 mm Hg=0.133 kPa);GAT测最的眼压值分别为(21.18±2.95)、(23.28±5.95)、(16.39±3.60)、(14.66±2.27)mm Hg.两者测量结果的差异无统计学意义(t=1.338,1.445,1.682,1.803;P=0.197,0.151,0.136,0.081).POAG、OHT、NTG及对照组的OPA值分别为3.03±1.13,3.53±1.43,2.21±0.55,2.87±0.60,组间比较差异有统计学意义(F=21.311,P=0.000);OPA值与心率、收缩压、舒张压、GAT测量值、CCT均相关,与年龄无明显相关性.结论 DCT测量结果与GAT有良好的一致性,受干扰因素少,可信度高;POAG、NTG、OHT患者和正常人的OPA存在差异,其中NCT患者OPA值明显较低,提示各组间眼内血液动力学状况的差异,OPA可能对青光眼的诊断及治疗具有一定的潜在价值.     

Goldmann tonometry versus the Tono-Pen XL for intraocular pressure measurement: an evaluation of the potential impact on clinical decision making in glaucoma

Aim:  To assess the validity of the Tono-Pen XL as an alternative to the Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT) for the measurement of intraocular pressure (IOP) in patients with ocular hypertension (OHT) and glaucoma.
Methods:  Over a 3 month period, patients with OHT or glaucoma attending a general clinic had IOP measurements taken using the Tono-Pen XL and the GAT. Tono-Pen measurements were taken by suitably trained nursing staff, while Goldmann tonometry was performed by the examining ophthalmologist.
Results:  There were 124 eyes of 62 patients in this study. Overall, mean IOP was 18.3 ± 4.8 mmHg using GAT and 18.8 ± 5.5 mmHg using the Tono-Pen. Using the Bland–Altman method, the upper and lower limits of agreement between the two devices were +10.6mmHg and −9.6 mmHg, respectively. Significant over- and under-estimates of IOP were noted in 10 (16%) patients.
Conclusion:  Our findings suggest that the Tono-Pen XL cannot be used as a substitute for GAT in the management of patients with glaucoma or OHT.     

Assessment of IcareONE rebound tonometer for self‐measuring intraocular pressure

Purpose: To evaluate the precision of the IcareONE rebound tonometer, which was developed for self‐measuring intraocular pressure (IOP) and to compare IcareONE measurement with Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT). Methods: Twenty‐four healthy eyes and 81 glaucomatous eyes were enrolled. IOP measurements (three times per session) with IcareONE were made in a random order by an ophthalmologist (Icare(O)) and by the subject (Icare(S)). Intraclass correlation coefficients (CCs), kappa values and mean values of IOP were compared among the two types of Icare recordings and GAT. Bland–Altman analysis was used to assess agreement between methods. Multiple regression analysis was performed to identify the subject factors that influenced the discordant measurements between IcareONE and GAT. Results: The mean value of Icare(O) and Icare(S) measurements was 13.5 ± 5.2 and 13.5 ± 5.4 mmHg, respectively, neither of which was significantly different from GAT (13.8 ± 4.4). The intrarater CC of Icare(O) and Icare(S) was 0.968 and 0.885, respectively. The intermethod CC and weighted kappa between Icare(O) and Icare(S) were 0.907 and 0.684, respectively. All pairwise correlations between the two types of IOP measurement showed coefficients of determination >0.8. Bland–Altman analysis did not show any proportional biases. Multiple regression analysis revealed that the differences between GAT and Icare(O) or Icare(S) were positively correlated with central corneal thickness (CCT) and negatively correlated with age. Conclusions: Intraocular pressure measurements with IcareONE by a physician and by the subject showed excellent agreement with GAT measurements; IcareONE measurements between a physician and the subject had high intrarater reliability, and good agreement thicker CCT led IcareONE measurement to overestimate IOP, while higher age caused it to underestimate IOP compared with GAT.     

Posture-induced changes in intraocular pressure: comparison of pseudoexfoliation glaucoma and primary open-angle glaucoma

Purpose

The objective of this study was to evaluate and compare the IOP values in the sitting and supine positions in primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) and pseudoexfoliation glaucoma (PXG) patients. We also investigated possible relationships between the level of visual field damage and postural IOP change.

Methods

Twenty-nine patients with POAG and 32 patients with PXG were recruited to the study. An Icare PRO tonometer was used to measure IOP in the sitting and supine positions. Intraocular pressure in the sitting position was also measured with a Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT). Humphrey field analyzer 750 data taken within the previous 3 months were obtained and analyzed.

Results

The mean difference between the GAT and the Icare PRO tonometer readings was 0.12 ± 0.8 mmHg, and the tonometers were in close agreement (r = 0.964; P < 0.0001). The mean Icare PRO IOP in the sitting position was 16.6 ± 3.3 mmHg in the POAG group and 14.9 ± 2.7 mmHg in the PXG group. The average rise was 1.7 ± 1.2 mmHg in the POAG group and 2.9 ± 1.9 mmHg in the PXG group. The difference in IOP between the sitting and supine positions was significant between the groups (P = 0.001). The ?IOP was negatively correlated with both the mean deviation and the visual field index (P < 0.0001 for both). The ?IOP and pattern standard deviation were positively correlated (P < 0.0001).

Conclusions

A higher increase in IOP was observed in PXG patients from the sitting to the supine position than in POAG patients. Postural variation in IOP was found to be associated with the severity of visual field damage.     

Comparison of the new rebound tonometer with Goldmann applanation tonometer in a clinical setting

Purpose: To evaluate the clinical usefulness of a new rebound tonometer, Icare^® PRO (Icare PRO), by comparison with Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) in a study on patients with glaucoma. Methods: One hundred and seventy‐two eyes of 86 subjects were enrolled in this study. All of the subjects were examined with an autorefractometer, Icare PRO, slit‐lamp biomicroscope, GAT, ultrasound A‐scan and pachymeter. Three intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements were obtained by Icare PRO and GAT. The intraobserver reliabilities were established by calculating the intraclass correlation coefficients. The Bland–Altman plot was used to compare the Icare PRO and GAT. Results: There was a good correlation between the IOP measurement by GAT and that by Icare PRO (r = 0.6995, p < 0.001). The intraclass correlation coefficients of Icare PRO and GAT were 0.778 and 0.955, respectively. The IOP differences between Icare PRO and GAT (mean: 1.92 mmHg; SD: 3.29 mmHg; 95% limit of agreement: ?4.52 to 8.37 mmHg) did not vary over the wide range of central corneal thickness (p = 0.498), age (p = 0.248), axial length (p = 0.277) or spherical equivalent (p = 0.075). Conclusions: Although IOP with Icare PRO was higher than that with GAT, especially at lower GAT IOP value, Icare PRO was found to be a reliable method and showed a good correlation with GAT. The IOP difference between Icare PRO and GAT was not affected by the central corneal thickness, age, axial length or spherical equivalent. Icare PRO can be expected not only to be a good screening tool but also to be a good substitute for GAT.