Computer vision syndrome in presbyopic digital device workers and progressive lens design

• Published in: Ophthalmic & physiological optics 2021-07, Vol.41 (4), p.922-931
• Main Authors: Sánchez‐Brau, Mar, Domenech‐Amigot, Begoña, Brocal‐Fernández, Francisco, Seguí‐Crespo, Mar
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Computer vision; computer vision syndrome; Computers; digital devices; Occupational exposure; presbyopia; progressive addition lenses; Vision; Workers
• ISSN: 0275-5408; 1475-1313
• DOI: 10.1111/opo.12832

Purpose To estimate the prevalence of computer vision syndrome (CVS) in presbyopic digital device workers using two ophthalmic progressive lens designs during the working day, and to analyse the association of CVS with sociodemographic, occupational, digital device exposure and refractive factors. Methods This time series, quasi‐experimental design study included 69 presbyopic digital device workers (age range: 46–69 years; mean ± SD = 54.7 ± 5.0). All used desktop computers at their workplace. Progressive addition lenses (PALs) and occupational lenses were used for three months each. CVS was measured with the CVS‐Q© questionnaire before intervention (baseline) and at 1 week, 1 month and 3 months after wearing the lenses. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to identify the factors that were associated with an improved CVS‐Q© score. Results 37.7% of the subjects were female and 78.3% were ametropes; 65.2% had advanced presbyopia. 56.2% used digital devices at work >6 h day−1. The prevalence of CVS at baseline, after wearing PALs for three months and after three months of occupational lens wear was 68.1%, 33.3% and 18.8%, respectively. The mean CVS‐Q© score was lower with occupational lenses than with PALs (p = 0.001). 40.6% of the digital device workers improved their CVS‐Q© score ≥2 points with the occupational lenses. Ametropes were less likely than emmetropes to improve with occupational lenses (OR = 0.27, p = 0.05). 89.8% of the sample workers were satisfied or very satisfied with the occupational lenses and 71% were similarly satisfied with the PALs. 73.9% chose the occupational lenses as their first choice of lens for digital device use, compared with 17.4% for PALs. Conclusions Computer vision syndrome is reduced in presbyopic desktop computer workers wearing occupational lenses compared with PALs, especially in emmetropes.