Table 4.
Results provided by different authors and by the current study after the application of equations correction.
| Author | n° eyes | Glaucoma | Chihara (6) | Ehlers (10) | Elsheikh 2009 (3) | Elsheikh 2011 (4) | Kohlhaas (9) | Srodka (5) | Doughty and Zaman (7) | Foster (8) | Shimmyo (1) | ShimmyoR (2) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Asejczyk-Widlika et al.25 | 108 | A 19 < P < 20 | ↑ | ↑ | ↓ | ↑ | ↓ | ↑ | ||||
| B 21 < P < 29 | ↑ | ↓ | ↓ | ↑ | ↓ | ↓ | ||||||
| C 30 < P < 42 | ↑ | ↑ | ↓ | ↑ | ↓ | ↑ | ↑ | |||||
| Ghee et al.24 |
135 65 |
Glaucoma suspect | ↑ | ↑ | ↑ | ↑ | ↑ | |||||
| Glaucoma group | ↓ | ↓ | ↓ | ↑ | ↓ | |||||||
| Wachtl et al.26 | 105 | Glaucoma subjects | ↑ | ↑ | ↑ | ↓ | ||||||
| Current study | 112 | No | ↑ | ↑ | ↑ | ↑ | ↑ | ↓ | ↑ | ↑ | ↑ | ↑ |
↑ = difference increase between the two methods (GAT and DCT) after correcction: poor usefull equation, ↓ = difference decrease between two methods (GAT and DCT) after correction: usefull equation. P = intraocular pressure, provided by GAT and expressed in mmHg.
In Asejczyk-Widlika et al.25 study subjects were divided in 3 groups (A, B, C) according to IOP values. In Ghee S et al.24 study subjects were divided in two groups (glaucoma suspect and glaucoma group).