The MT had an average of 12.6 ± 2.5 (standard deviation) arbitrary units (AU), whereas the MV had an average of 48.3 ± 7.0 AU. The intraclass correlation coefficients among the three measurements were 0.943 (95% CI: 0.927–0.955) for MT measurement and 0.908 (0.883– 0.928) for MV measurement. In 69 individuals whose both eyes met the inclusion criteria, the MT values were 12.7 ± 2.5 and 12.4 ± 2.5 AU (paired
t-test,
P = 0.225) and the MV values were 48.8 ± 7.4 and 47.8 ± 6.3 AU (
P = 0.231) for the right and left eyes, respectively. A simple correlation analysis showed a significant negative correlation between MT and gender (greater in female), MAP, disc area, and cup area; a significant negative correlation between MV and age, gender (greater in female), MAP, and AL; and a significant positive correlation between MV and heart rate and cup area (
Table 2).
Tables 3A and 3
B show the results of the multivariate linear mixed-effects modeled linear regression analysis assessing the contribution of each factor to MT and MV. MAP showed a significant negative correlation (
P < 0.001), whereas β-PPA area showed a significant positive correlation with MT (
P = 0.010). Meanwhile, disc area showed a significant negative correlation with MT (
P < 0.001) when disc and rim areas or disc and cup areas were adopted as explanatory variables, whereas both rim and cup areas showed negative correlations (
P < 0.001) when rim and cup areas were adopted as explanatory variables. Because the disc area is the sum of the rim and cup areas, the correlation of the disc structural parameters with MT is summarized as a significant negative correlation between disc area and MT (
P < 0.001) (
Table 3A). Age and AL showed a significant negative correlation (
P = 0.001 and
P = 0.011, respectively), whereas disc area showed a significant positive correlation with MV (
P = 0.012) when disc and rim areas were adopted as explanatory variables. Cup area showed a significant positive correlation with MV (
P = 0.012) when rim and cup areas were adopted as explanatory variables. On the basis of the theory above and considering that the correlation of rim and cup areas (
P = 0.065) were reversed, when disc and rim or cup were adopted as explanatory variables, the correlation of the disc structural parameters with MV is summarized as a significant positive correlation of cup area (
P = 0.012) (
Table 3B).
Figures 2A and
2B show the scatterplots of the relationships between those contributing factors and MT or MV.