Distribution of intraocular pressure in a Swedish population

  • Maria Häkkinen Department of Surgical Sciences, Ophthalmology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden
  • Curt Ekström Department of Surgical Sciences, Ophthalmology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8265-6518
Keywords: Diabetes, epidemiology, intraocular pressure, open-angle glaucoma, population survey, pseudoexfoliation, repeated applanation tonometry, risk factor


Background: Increased intraocular pressure (IOP) and pseudoexfoliation (PEX) are major risk factors for open-angle glaucoma (OAG), an age-related neurodegenerative disease of significant importance for public health. There are few studies on the distribution of IOP in populations where PEX is a common finding.

Methods: The distribution of IOP was studied in 733 subjects 65–74 years of age, examined in a population survey in the rural district of Tierp, Sweden, 1984–86. The difference between the right and left eye and the effect of which eye was measured first were examined. Odds ratios, adjusted for age and sex, according to Mantel-Haenszel (ORMH), were calculated to estimate predictors of increased IOP, defined as a pressure ≥20 mm Hg in either eye. The pressure was measured with Goldmann applanation tonometry. Automated perimetry was used to identify OAG.

Results: The distribution of IOP was close to that of other European-derived populations. The pressure in the first measured eye was higher than in the second measured eye. Increased IOP was related to OAG and PEX, ORMH 8.97 (95% confidence interval [CI] 3.84–20.9) and 2.40 (95% CI 1.53–3.76), respectively. An IOP ≥20 mm Hg increased the risk of having been diagnosed with diabetes (ORMH 1.83; 95% CI 1.08–3.09).

Conclusion: In this study of subjects 65–74-years-old in Sweden, the distribution of IOP was close to that of other European-derived populations. Although the difference was small, the pressure in the first measured eye was higher than in the second eye. Increased IOP was strongly related to untreated OAG and PEX.


Download data is not yet available.


1. Tham YC, Li X, Wong TY, Quigley HA, Aung T, Cheng CY. Global prevalence of glaucoma and projections of glaucoma burden through 2040: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ophthalmology 2014;121:2081–90. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2014.05.013

2. Ekström C. Risk factors for incident open-angle glaucoma: a population-based 20-year follow-up study. Acta Ophthalmol 2012;90:316–21. doi: 10.1111/j.1755–3768.2010.01943.x

3. Ritch R, Schlötzer-Schrehardt U. Exfoliation syndrome. Ophthalmology 2014;121:2081–90. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2014.05.013

4. Thorleifsson G, Magnusson KP, Sulem P, Walters GB, Gudbjartsson DF, Stefansson H, et. al. Common sequence variants in the LOXL1 gene confer susceptibility to exfoliation glaucoma. Science 2007;317:1397–400. doi: 10.1126/science.1146554

5. Hollows FC, Graham PA. Intra-ocular pressure, glaucoma, and glaucoma suspects in a defined population. Br J Ophthalmol 1966;50:570–86. doi: 10.1136/bjo.50.10.570

6. Leibowitz HM, Krueger DE, Maunder LR, Milton RC, Kini MM, Kahn HA, et al. The Framingham eye study monograph: an ophthalmological and epidemiological study of cataract, glaucoma, diabetic retinopathy, macular degeneration, and visual acuity in a general population of 2631 adults, 1973–1975. Surv Ophthalmol 1980;24:335–610.

7. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KL. Intraocular pressure in an American community. The Beaver Dam eye study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1992;33:2224–8. doi: 10.1016/S0161-6420(92)32011-1

8. Bengtsson B. Some factors affecting the distribution of intraocular pressures in a population. Acta Ophthalmol 1972;50:33–46. doi: 10.1111/j.1755-3768.1972.tb05639.x

9. Bengtsson B. Findings associated with glaucomatous visual field defects. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh) 1980;58:20–32. doi: 10.1111/j.17550–3768.1980.tb04561.x

10. Hiller R, Sperduto RD, Krueger DE. Pseudoexfoliation, intraocular pressure, and senile lens changes in a population-based survey. Arch Ophthalmol 1982;100:1080–2. doi: 10.1001/archopht.1982.01030040058007

11. Davanger M, Ringvold A, Blika S. Pseudo-exfoliation, IOP and glaucoma. Acta Ophthalmol 1991;69:569–73. doi: 10.1111/j.1755–3768.1991.tb04841.x

12. Arnarsson A, Damji KF, Sverrisson T, Sasaki H, Jonasson F. Pseudoexfoliation in the Reykjavik eye study: prevalence and related ophthalmological variables. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 2007;85:822–7. doi: 10.1111/j.1600–0420.2007.01051.x

13. Hirvelä H, Tuulonen A, Laatikainen L. Intraocular pressure and prevalence of glaucoma in elderly people in Finland: a population-based study. Int Ophthalmol 1994–1995;18:299–307. doi: 10.1007/BF00917834

14. Eysteinsson T, Jonasson F, Sasaki H, Arnarsson A, Sverrisson T, Sasaki K, et al. Central corneal thickness, radius of the corneal curvature and intraocular pressure in normal subjects using non-contact techniques: Reykjavik eye study. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 2002;80:11–15. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-0420.2002.800103.x

15. Topouzis F, Wilson MR, Harris A, Anastasopoulos E, Yu F, Mavroudis L. Prevalence of open-angle glaucoma in Greece: the Thessaloniki eye study. Am J Ophthalmol 2007;144:511–19. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2007.06.029

16. Åström S, Stenlund H, Lindén C. Intraocular pressure changes over 21 years – a longitudinal age-cohort study in northern Sweden. Acta Ophthalmol 2014;92:417–20. doi: 10.1111/aos.12232

17. Ekström C. Prevalence of open-angle glaucoma in central Sweden. The Tierp Glaucoma Survey. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 1996;74:107–12. doi: 10.1111/j.1600–0420.1996.tb00052.x

18. Foster PJ, Buhrmann R, Quigley HA, Johnson GJ. The definition and classification of glaucoma in prevalence surveys. Br J Ophthalmol 2002;86:238–42. doi: 10.1136/bjo.86.2.238

19. Krakau CET, Wilke K. On repeated tonometry. Acta Ophthalmol 1971;49:726–9. doi: 10.1111/j.1755-3768.1971.tb02968.x

20. Wilke K. Effects of repeated tonometry: genuine and sham measurements. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh) 1972;50:574–82. doi: 10.1111/j.1755-3768.1972.tb05987.x

21. Motolko MA, Feldman F, Hyde M, Hudy D. Sources of variability in the results of applanation tonometry. Can J Ophthalmol 1982;17:93–5.

22. Gaton DD, Ehrenberg M, Lusky M, Wussuki-Lior O, Dotan G, Weinberger D, et al. Effect of repeated applanation tonometry on the accuracy of intraocular pressure measurements. Curr Eye Res 2010;35:475–9. doi: 10.3109/02713681003678824

23. Moses RA. Repeated applanation tonometry. Ophthalmologica 1961;142:663–8. doi: 10.1159/000304168

24. Abe RY, Silva TC, Dantas I, Curado SX, Madeira MS, de Sousa LB, et al. Can psychologic stress elevate intraocular pressure in healthy individuals? Ophthalmol Glaucoma 2020;3:426–33. doi: 10.1016/j.ogla.2020.06.011

25. Sommer A, Tielsch JM, Katz J, Quigley HA, Gottsch JD, Javitt J, et al. Relationship between intraocular pressure and open-angle glaucoma among white and black Americans. The Baltimore Eye Survey. Arch Ophthalmol 1991;109:1090–5. doi: 10.1001/archopht.1991.01080080050026

26. Mitchell P, Smith W, Attebo K, Healey PR. Prevalence of open-angle glaucoma in Australia. The Blue Mountains eye study. Ophthalmology 1996;103:1661–9. doi: 10.1016/s0161-6420(96)30449-1

27. Weih LM, Nanjan M, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. Prevalence and predictors of open-angle glaucoma: results from the visual impairment project. Ophthalmology 2001;108:1966–72. doi: 10.1016/s0161-6420(01)00799-0

28. Rochtchina E, Mitchell P, Wang JJ. Relationship between age and intraocular pressure: the Blue Mountains eye study. Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2002;30:173–5. doi: 10.1046/j.1442-9071.2002.00519.x

29. Tielsch JM, Katz J, Quigley HA, Javitt JC, Sommer A. Diabetes, intraocular pressure, and primary open-angle glaucoma in the Baltimore Eye Survey. Ophthalmology 1995;102:48–53. doi: 10.1016/s0161–6420(95)31055–x

30. Dielemans I, de Jong PT, Stolk R, Vingerling JR, Grobbee DE, Hofman A. Primary open-angle glaucoma, intraocular pressure, and diabetes mellitus in the general elderly population. The Rotterdam study. Ophthalmology 1996;103:1271–5. doi: 10.1016/s0161-6420(96)30511-3

31. Mitchell P, Smith W, Chey T, Healey PR. Open-angle glaucoma and diabetes: the Blue Mountains eye study, Australia. Ophthalmology 1997;104:712–18. doi: 10.1016/s0161-6420(97)30247–4

32. Zhou Q, Liang YB, Wong TY, Yang XH, Lian L, Zhu D, et al. Intraocular pressure and its relationship to ocular and systemic factors in a healthy Chinese rural population: the Handan eye study. Ophthalmic Epidemiol 2012;19:278–84. doi: 10.3109/09286586.2012.708084

33. Clark CV, Mapstone R. The prevalence of diabetes mellitus in the family history of patients with primary glaucoma. Doc Ophthalmol 1986;62:161–3. doi: 10.1007/BF00229127
How to Cite
Häkkinen M., & Ekström C. (2022). Distribution of intraocular pressure in a Swedish population. Upsala Journal of Medical Sciences, 127(1). https://doi.org/10.48101/ujms.v127.8829