Abstract

To the Editor. —Thank you so much for allowing me to reply to Dr. Johnson's letter. I have been informed on several occasions that the 1948 Schiotz table gives closer correlation with applanation values than does the 1955 scale. This is explained by the fact that the same scale reading is interpreted as showing a higher intraouclar pressure in millimeters of mercury using the 1948 table than with the 1955 one. However, Schiotz scholars and tonography experts have apparently taken a definite stand that the 1955 table is more accurate and should replace the 1948 table. I do not propose to enter the controversy as to whether the 1948 or the 1955 Schiotz table is preferable, since this seems like trying to abandon the better mouse trap in order to determine whether the poorer mouse trap should be loaded with limburger or liederkranz. Since Dr. Johnson agrees that the Goldmann

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.