Comparison of intraocular pressure in New Zealand White rabbits measured using rebound and applanation tonometers and four different methods of physical restraint.

AIMS: To compare intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements obtained in rabbits using rebound (TV) and applanation (TPV) tonometers with four different methods of physical restraint. METHODS: A total of 20 New Zealand White rabbits (40 eyes) were included in this study. IOP readings were obtained from both eyes using the two different tonometers. The rabbits were placed on a table and restrained by wrapping in a cloth (Method I), by scruffing with rear support (Method II), by wrapping in a cloth and cupped in the hands (Method III), or by a box restrainer (Method IV). RESULTS: The mean IOP measurement obtained by TPV was higher than that obtained with the TV for all handling methods. Mean differences (TV-TPV, in mmHg) in IOP were -5.3 (95% Cl = -6.5 to -4.1) for Method 1, -4.7 (95% Cl = -6.2 to -3.29) for Method II, -4.9 (95% Cl = -6.2 to -3.7) for Method III and -7.6 (95% Cl = -9.2 to -5.9) for Method IV. Using the TV tonometer, mean IOP for Method IV was higher than for Method I (mean difference 2.1 (95% Cl = 1.1-3.1)), whereas using the TPV tonometer, mean IOP for Method IV was significantly higher than Method I, II, and III (mean differences: 4.4 (95% Cl = 2.6-5.9), 3.7 (95% Cl = 2-5.3) and 3.8 (95% Cl = 2-5.4), respectively). According to Bland-Altman plots, IOP readings for TPV tended to be higher than those for TV with all handling methods, but with a lack of agreement. The mean difference and 95% limits of agreement for the differences between TV and TPV were -5.4 mmHg (-12.5-1.9 mmHg), -4.7 mmHg (-12.9-3.5 mmHg), -4.9 mmHg (-12-2.2 mmHg), and -7.5 mmHg (-17.4-2.3 mmHg), with Methods I, II, III, and IV, respectively. Comparing TV and TPV, only 7.5%, 12.5%, 27.5%, and 15% of IOP measurements from 20 rabbits were within the range considered clinically acceptable for IOP (± 2 mmHg) for Method I, II, III, and IV, respectively. CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: In conclusion, the physical restraint method should be recorded when IOP is measured in rabbits, and TV and TPV tonometers cannot be used interchangeably (high bias and low proportion of measurements within ± 2 mmHg).

The agreement of rectal temperature with gingival, ocular and metacarpal pad temperatures in clinically healthy dogs.

AIMS: To compare alternative methods of recording body temperature (BT) with rectal temperature (RT) in clinically healthy dogs. METHODS: This prospective study included 97 healthy mixed-breed dogs (43 females and 54 males). The gingival temperature (GT) was collected by using a human non-contact, infrared forehead thermometer, while ocular temperature (OT) and metacarpal pad temperature (MPT) were obtained with an infrared thermal camera. The degree of agreement was determined using the Bland-Altman method, with RT considered as the reference temperature. RESULTS: A total of 382 readings were obtained from four different anatomical regions. The mean difference and their 95% limits of agreement for the differences between RT-GT, RT-OT, and RT-MPT were 0.18°C (-0.95°C-1.32°C), 0.79°C (-0.45°C-2.04°C), and 0.50°C (-0.63°C-1.62°C), respectively. The GT, OT, and MPT values were within ±0.5°C of RT for 65.9%, 19.5%, and 52.5% of dogs, respectively. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Although GT, OT, and MPT were a quick way to estimate BT in dogs, these measurements were not comparable with RT. The GT measurement achieved the best agreement with RT measurement (lowest bias and the highest proportion of measurements within ±0.5°C). The GT could be considered an option for monitoring changes to body temperature in clinically healthy dogs where RT measurement is not possible.