Volume : VI, Issue : VI, June - 2016

The Comparison of Intraocular Pressure Lowering Efficacy Of 0.5% Timolol Maleate Versus 0.0015% Tafluprost in Cases of Primary Open Angle Glaucoma and Ocular Hypertension

Gursatinder Singh, Navneet Kaur, Ankush Bhagat, Anita K Gupta

Abstract :

 Objectives: To compare the intraocular pressure lowering efficacy of 0.5% timolol maleate versus 0.0015% tafluprost in cases of primary open angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension. Methods and Materials: This prospective, open, randomized, parallel group study was conducted in 80 newly diagnosed primary open angle glaucoma (POAG) and ocular hypertension (OHT) cases which were randomized into two groups (I and II) of 40 cases each and received 0.5% timolol maleate and 0.0015% tafluprost respectively. Efficacy of the drugs was calculated as mmHg lowering in mean IOP observed at the end of 3 months and the observations made in both groups were compared using appropriate statistical tools. Results: IOP at the different time points assessed during the baseline visit ranged from 24.27 to 25.10 mmHg, with a mean of 24.60 mmHg in group I and 24.65 to 25.45 mmHg, with a mean of 25.04 mmHg in group II. IOP at various time points assessed after 12 weeks ranged from 18.12 to 18.60 mmHg, with a mean of 18.36 mmHg for group I and 16.52 to 17.47 mmHg, with a mean of 16.97 mmHg for group II. Mean diurnal IOP reduction with timolol and tafluprost was 6.24 mmHg (25.37%) and 8.07 mmHg (32.23%) respectively, with the difference being statistically significant. Conclusions: There is significant difference in IOP lowering efficacy between the two groups with tafluprost consistently achieving greater reduction in IOP as compared to timolol.

Keywords :

Article: Download PDF   DOI : 10.36106/ijar  

Cite This Article:

Gursatinder Singh, Navneet Kaur, Ankush Bhagat, Anita K Gupta The Comparison of Intraocular Pressure Lowering Efficacy Of 0.5% Timolol Maleate Versus 0.0015% Tafluprost in Cases of Primary Open Angle Glaucoma and Ocular Hypertension Indian Journal of Applied Research, Vol.6, Issue : 6 JUNE 2016


Number of Downloads : 646


References :

<p><p><p><pre></pre></p></p></p>