Background: Accommodation plays an important role during reading at near. So, this study wants to compare the amount of the amplitude of accommodation in various reading posture.Method: A non randomized cross sectional study was carried out with the help of convenience sampling method. The study subjects included 32 Malaysians aged between 15 to 35 years despite race and gender. The research was accomplished within a period of six months (Jan 2015 to Jun 2015) at Twintech vision clinic. Minus lens method was used to measure Amplitude of Accommodation for three different postures.To investigate the changes in amplitude of accommodation among sitting, standing and supine positions, one-way repeated measures ANOVA was used.Result: Total number of subject was 32, out of which 16 were male and 16 female. Amplitude of accommodation was altered significantly (p<0.001) in three different position (with the mean difference of 1.289D from sitting to standing posture). However, amplitude of accommodation among genders and race for different reading posture was not significant (p>0.05). Amplitude of accommodation among refractive error groups were found statistically significant (p<0.05). Conclusion:Alteration in reading posture increases amplitude of accommodation when changing from sitting to standing posture. So, the reading posture must be taken into consideration during clinical evaluation of the amplitude of accommodation.

illumination. Further, to associate AA among genders, age groups, race and refractive error for different levels of room illumination was not significant (p > 0.05). However, amplitude of accommodation between 15-21years and 22-28 years showed significant (p = 0.047) difference for the first room illumination. CONCLUSION:The illumination has no clinically significant effect on amplitude of accommodation. INTRODUCTIONSince 1972, research into the effects of the VDU on the eye expanded [1] . Due to technological advances, millions of people such as office worker and college students are using computers for prolonged hours. However, after prolonged uses of these visual display units, the symptoms reported were eyestrain, tired eyes, headache, blurred vision, irritation, burning sensation, redness, double vision, neck pain, backache which might caused by combination of individual visual problems, poor workplace conditions and improper work habits [2][3] . On top of that, eye related symptoms reported as the most common health problem among VDT users [4][5][6] . To measure amplitude of accommodation is one of the necessary part of an eye examination to find out optimal refractive corrections and to reduce the eye related symptoms when doing near work especially while using visual display unit as a target. In addition, accommodation was proven to have association with the symptom of visual fatigue and asthenopia while doing near work. Abnormality associated with accommodation such as accommodative insufficiency, accommodative infacility and lag of accommodation reported among video display terminal (VDU) users in Nepal [7] . Several other studies have shown that visual tasks using visual display unit (VDU) terminals may induce temporary effects in the Convenience sampling method applied. The data analysis carried out by using one way repeated measure ANOVA, to look into the changes in amplitude of accommodation in different illuminations (23 Lux, 17 Lux and 4 Lux). RESULT: 32 subjects' data analyzed. Amplitude of accommodation measured via minus-lens method. No significant change noted among three levels of room illumination (p > 0.05) with the mean difference of 0.222DS from the first room illumination to third room

AIM: To determine the status of non-strabismic binocular vision anomalies (NSBVA) among students of a Malaysian private university uses visual display units (VDU). METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among university students who use VDU 3h or more from January 2019 to May 2019. A convenient sampling method was utilized. All subjects had gone through primary eye-examinations to satisfy the inclusion criteria. Those who satisfy the inclusion criteria, further gone through the NSBVA assessment. The descriptive analysis was done to rule out the percentage of NSBVA and Chi-square test of independence was carried out to observe the association of NSBVA with age, gender and hours of VDU usage. RESULTS: A total of 140 students including 88 females (62.9%) and 52 males (37.1%) participated in this study. The mean age of the participants was 22.54±1.48 years and the mean VDU usage hours were 5.76±2.49h. The percentage of NSBVA is 40% among the students those who use VDU. The occurrence of accommodative and vergence anomalies among the VDU users is 17.86% and 22.14% respectively. There was a moderate association between gender and NSBVA (P=0.010). However, there was no significant association observed for age (P=0.334) and hours of VDU usage (P=0.835) with NSBVA. CONCLUSION: NSBVA is 40% among the students of a Malaysian private university uses VDU. Accommodation insufficiency (15%) and convergence insufficiency (10%) is more common among all NSBVA for VDU users.

Background: Dyslexia is a key learning disorder associated with reading difficulties in children. The purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness of simple visual devices in improving the reading performance of children with dyslexia. Methods: A case?control study was conducted by selecting 80 school children with dyslexia, aged 8?11 years, from the Special Dyslexic School Program of the Ministry of Education (MOE) Malaysia. Subjects were randomly assigned to four groups: the typoscope, magnifier, visual tracking magnifier (VTM), and control groups. Reading performance was measured based on reading speed and reading error rate. The time taken to complete reading of text was measured, and reading errors were recorded. The reading performance of each group was assessed at baseline, week 2, week 6, and week 12. Results: Reading performance was significantly different (P < 0.05) for both Level 1 and Level 2, before and after intervention only in children with dyslexia using magnifiers and VTM. Reading performance for children with dyslexia using a magnifier or a VTM increased significantly (P < 0.05) from baseline to week 2, week 6, and week 12. The improvement in reading speed was 2.5 times faster for children in the VTM group than in the other groups. Conclusions: Simple visual aids, such as a VTM and magnifying glass, improved reading performance in children with dyslexia. The VTM intervention yielded the greatest improvement after 12 weeks of intervention. Hence, it is suggested that a VTM be used as part of a rehabilitation program for all children with dyslexia in Malaysia, particularly those in dyslexia programs in schools under the MOE Malaysia. However, future studies with longer follow-up periods are needed to confirm the sustainability of this improved reading performance after discontinuation of the intervention.

No abstract