349 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12859105)
41. Comparison of the new rebound tonometer with Goldmann applanation tonometer in a clinical setting.
Kim KN; Jeoung JW; Park KH; Yang MK; Kim DM
Acta Ophthalmol; 2013 Aug; 91(5):e392-6. PubMed ID: 23521889
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
42. Agreement of rebound tonometer in measuring intraocular pressure with three types of applanation tonometers.
Nakamura M; Darhad U; Tatsumi Y; Fujioka M; Kusuhara A; Maeda H; Negi A
Am J Ophthalmol; 2006 Aug; 142(2):332-4. PubMed ID: 16876523
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
43. Intraocular pressure measurement: Goldmann Applanation Tonometer vs non contact airpuff tonometer.
Shah MA; Bin Saleem K; Mehmood T
J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad; 2012; 24(3-4):21-4. PubMed ID: 24669600
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
44. The relative effects of corneal thickness and age on Goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry.
Kotecha A; White ET; Shewry JM; Garway-Heath DF
Br J Ophthalmol; 2005 Dec; 89(12):1572-5. PubMed ID: 16299132
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
45. Comparison of the ocular response analyzer and the Goldmann applanation tonometer for measuring intraocular pressure after deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty.
Feizi S; Hashemloo A; Rastegarpour A
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2011 Jul; 52(8):5887-91. PubMed ID: 21447674
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
46. Corneal thickness- and age-related biomechanical properties of the cornea measured with the ocular response analyzer.
Kotecha A; Elsheikh A; Roberts CR; Zhu H; Garway-Heath DF
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2006 Dec; 47(12):5337-47. PubMed ID: 17122122
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
47. Intraocular pressure measurement with Corvis ST in comparison with applanation tonometry and Tomey non-contact tonometry.
Luebke J; Bryniok L; Neuburger M; Jordan JF; Boehringer D; Reinhard T; Wecker T; Anton A
Int Ophthalmol; 2019 Nov; 39(11):2517-2521. PubMed ID: 30968328
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
48. Intraocular pressure measurements with the newly reconfigured Ocuton S*TT-MV self-tonometer in comparison to Goldmann applanation tonometry in glaucoma patients.
Lanfermann E; Jürgens C; Grossjohann R; Antal S; Tost F
Med Sci Monit; 2009 Nov; 15(11):CR556-62. PubMed ID: 19865054
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
49. Disposable devices for measuring intraocular pressure: a clinical study to assess their accuracy.
Bhatnagar A; Gupta AK
Eye (Lond); 2005 Jul; 19(7):752-4. PubMed ID: 15359247
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
50. Clinical evaluation of the IOPen® in a glaucomatous population.
Jorge J; Fernandes P; Queirós A; Ribeiro P; Ferreira A; Gonzalez-Meijome JM
Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 2010 Nov; 30(6):860-4. PubMed ID: 21205273
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
51. [Measurement of intraocular pressure using the Tono-Pen in comparison with Goldmann applanation tonometry - a clinical study in 100 eyes].
Deuter CM; Schlote T; Hahn GA; Bende T; Derse M
Klin Monbl Augenheilkd; 2002 Mar; 219(3):138-42. PubMed ID: 11987041
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
52. Comparison of intraocular pressure measurements with the digital tonometer TGDc-01 'PRA' and the Goldmann applanation tonometer.
Meyer MW; Gockeln R; Hoy L; Meyer A; Erb C
Ophthalmic Res; 2004; 36(5):250-4. PubMed ID: 15583430
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
53. Comparison of the ICare rebound tonometer with the Goldmann applanation tonometer by experienced and inexperienced tonometrists.
Abraham LM; Epasinghe NC; Selva D; Casson R
Eye (Lond); 2008 Apr; 22(4):503-6. PubMed ID: 17159973
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
54. Comparison of rebound tonometer and Goldmann handheld applanation tonometer in congenital glaucoma.
Martinez-de-la-Casa JM; Garcia-Feijoo J; Saenz-Frances F; Vizzeri G; Fernandez-Vidal A; Mendez-Hernandez C; Garcia-Sanchez J
J Glaucoma; 2009 Jan; 18(1):49-52. PubMed ID: 19142135
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
55. Comparison of intraocular pressure using Goldmann applanation tonometry versus non-contact tonometry in eyes with high-viscosity silicone oil.
Pagoulatos DD; Kapsala ZG; Makri OE; Georgalas IG; Georgakopoulos CD
Eur J Ophthalmol; 2020 May; 30(3):494-499. PubMed ID: 30832494
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
56. Intraocular pressure measurement in mice: a comparison between Goldmann and rebound tonometry.
Kim CY; Kuehn MH; Anderson MG; Kwon YH
Eye (Lond); 2007 Sep; 21(9):1202-9. PubMed ID: 16946746
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
57. Goldmann tonometry versus the Tono-Pen XL for intraocular pressure measurement: an evaluation of the potential impact on clinical decision making in glaucoma.
Carrim ZI; Lavy TE
Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 2009 Nov; 29(6):648-51. PubMed ID: 19821927
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
58. Icare rebound tonometry in children with known and suspected glaucoma.
Flemmons MS; Hsiao YC; Dzau J; Asrani S; Jones S; Freedman SF
J AAPOS; 2011 Apr; 15(2):153-7. PubMed ID: 21419676
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
59. Three portable tonometers, the TGDc-01, the ICARE and the Tonopen XL, compared with each other and with Goldmann applanation tonometry*.
van der Jagt LH; Jansonius NM
Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 2005 Sep; 25(5):429-35. PubMed ID: 16101949
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
60. Clinical evaluation of applanation resonance tonometry: a comparison with Goldmann applanation tonometry.
Hallberg P; Eklund A; Bäcklund T; Lindén C
J Glaucoma; 2007 Jan; 16(1):88-93. PubMed ID: 17224756
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
