Literature DB >> 17293157

Are there differences between 'visual symptoms' and specific ocular symptoms associated with video display terminal (VDT) use?

Bente Monica Aakre1, Michael J Doughty.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: To assess the reliability of self-reported symptoms of asthenopia associated with VDT use (as characterized by general visual symptoms, headache and specific ocular symptoms) for both continuing soft contact lens (SCL) wearers and former SCL wearers who had undergone successful laser-in-situ-keratomileusis (LASIK) surgery.
METHODS: Forty generally healthy adults, aged between 24 and 44 years, were asked to complete a 13 page questionnaire that included requests for information on general visual symptoms, headache and specific ocular symptoms such as dry eye associated with VDT use. The adults were either long term successful soft contact lens wearers (n=20) or a similar group who had then undergone successful LASIK refractive surgery for myopia 2 years prior to the questionnaire being provided.
RESULTS: Most subjects (70%) reported experiencing some visual symptoms sometimes, 62.5% reported headaches sometimes, and 82.5 % reported specific ocular symptoms sometimes. There were no obvious differences between the two groups either in the reported frequency or severity (by visual analogue scale, VAS) of visual symptoms, headache or specific ocular symptoms. However, while the reporting of headache showed no obvious association with the number of specific ocular symptoms reported, the latter showed a clear correlation with the reporting of the severity of visual symptoms (p<0.001). DISCUSSION: The results indicate that when an individual reports visual symptoms, they may actually be providing recall of specific ocular symptoms. Therefore, contrary to an often common practice, visual symptoms should be assessed separately to specific ocular symptoms such that the appropriate management can be selected. The results also indicate that previous contact lens wearers who have undergone successful LASIK are still likely to experience some visual and specific ocular symptoms when undertaking computer based work on a regular basis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17293157     DOI: 10.1016/j.clae.2007.01.001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cont Lens Anterior Eye        ISSN: 1367-0484            Impact factor:   3.077


  9 in total

1.  Frequent spontaneous eyeblink activity associated with reduced conjunctival surface (trigeminal nerve) tactile sensitivity.

Authors:  Michael J Doughty; Taher Naase; Norman F Button
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2009-01-20       Impact factor: 3.117

2.  Prevalence of asthenopia and its risk factors in Chinese college students.

Authors:  Cheng-Cheng Han; Rong Liu; Ru-Ru Liu; Zhong-Hai Zhu; Rong-Bin Yu; Le Ma
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2013-10-18       Impact factor: 1.779

3.  Spontaneous eyeblink activity under different conditions of gaze (eye position) and visual glare.

Authors:  Michael J Doughty
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2014-05-29       Impact factor: 3.117

4.  Ocular surface and tear film status among contact lens wearers and non-wearers who use VDT at work: comparing three different lens types.

Authors:  Ana Tauste; Elena Ronda; Valborg Baste; Magne Bråtveit; Bente E Moen; María-Del-Mar Seguí Crespo
Journal:  Int Arch Occup Environ Health       Date:  2017-12-04       Impact factor: 3.015

5.  Scale and spatial distribution of aberrations associated with tear breakup.

Authors:  Nikole L Himebaugh; Jayoung Nam; Arthur Bradley; Haixia Liu; Larry N Thibos; Carolyn G Begley
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 1.973

Review 6.  Changes in blink rate and ocular symptoms during different reading tasks.

Authors:  Ali A Abusharha
Journal:  Clin Optom (Auckl)       Date:  2017-11-20

7.  Video display terminal use and other risk factors for abnormal blinking in children: gender differences.

Authors:  Hui Zhao; Shi-Nan Wu; Qi Zhang; Chen Zhao; Hui-Ye Shu; Qian-Min Ge; Yi Shao
Journal:  BMC Ophthalmol       Date:  2021-12-10       Impact factor: 2.209

8.  Comparison of Subjective Refraction under Binocular and Monocular Conditions in Myopic Subjects.

Authors:  Hidenaga Kobashi; Kazutaka Kamiya; Tomoya Handa; Wakako Ando; Takushi Kawamorita; Akihito Igarashi; Kimiya Shimizu
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2015-07-28       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Factor structure of the convergence insufficiency symptom survey questionnaire.

Authors:  Amélia Fernandes Nunes; Pedro Lourenço Monteiro; António Santos Nunes
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-02-24       Impact factor: 3.240

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.