Introduction. Computer vision syndrome (CVS) is “a complex of eye and vision problems related to near work experienced during computer use.” It is one of the rising health concerns related to technology (cell phones and tablets) due to continuous use of computers among students. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of CVS, associated risk factors, and commonly associated symptoms and to assess the awareness and proper practice of using computers for studying. Methods. A cross-sectional descriptive study was conducted among 651 undergraduate medical students in King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. An electronic survey was conducted to collect the data. Data were analyzed using SPSS v21. The chi-square test (Fisher’s exact test when required) was used to study the significance of associations. P value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results. High prevalence of CVS was observed, in which 95% (558) reported at least one symptom during studying using computers. Most frequently reported symptoms were excessive tearing and neck, shoulder, or back pain. Female students had a higher risk of CVS (P=0.003). Students who are myopic or hyperopic showed no association. Astigmatism was associated significantly with CVS (P=0.03). Using spectacles or contact lens showed no association. Students with dry eye disease revealed a significant association with CVS (P=0.01). The most significant risk factors related to the daily usage of computer were longer duration of studying (P<0.001), short distance from the screen (P<0.05), and high brightness of the screen (P<0.05). The most significant preventive measure taken to relieve the symptoms was applying the 20-20-20 rule. Conclusion. CVS is common among medical students; significant risk factors need to be addressed to reduce the symptom and to ensure a better productivity of work. It is a necessity to raise awareness among medical students regarding computer-related health problems.

Purpose Anterior segment evaluation using Scheimpflug imaging with the Pentacam scanner allows the acquisition of a plethora of information. It aids in screening and diagnosing corneal pathologies and determining suitability for keratorefractive procedures. This research has significant benefits in terms of establishing normative tomographic values, which is crucial in countries where Keratoconus (KC) is more prevalent, especially among young age group, along with aiding future research in the field of refractive surgery by providing relevant normative data. Methods A retrospective review of digital corneal tomography images for a group of medically and ophthalmologically free males aged between 18 and 21 years with 20/20 unaided distant visual acuity was performed. Results A total of 1272 subjects (2544 eyes) were included. Findings revealed a mean maximal corneal curvature (Kmax) of 42.91 ± 1.40D (range 36.90–47.80D). The mean flat keratometry (K1) was 41.87 ± 1.31D (range 36.00–46.40D). The mean steep keratometry (K2) was 42.66 ± 1.35D (range 36.70–47.60D). The mean corneal astigmatism (CA) was 0.79 ± 0.37D (range 0.00D-2.30D). The mean central corneal thickness (CCT) was 558.53 ± 33.84 μm (range 421–677 μm). The mean thinnest corneal location thickness (TCLT) was 551.64 ± 34.08 μm (range 417–669μm). The mean corneal diameter (CD) and anterior chamber depth (ACD) were 12.13 ± 0.39 mm (range 10.50–13.60 mm) and 3.12 ± 0.29 mm (range 2.08–4.08 mm), respectively. The median differences between both eyes of the same subject were as follows: kmax difference of 0.20D (IQR 0.1–0.4); K1, K2 and CA difference of 0.20D (IQR 0.1–0.3) for all 3 parameters; CCT and TCLT difference of 5.00 μm (IQR 3.0–9.0) and 6.00 μm (IQR 3.0–10.0), respectively; CD difference of 0.10 mm (IQR 0.0–0.1); and ACD difference of 0.04 (IQR 0.02–0.06). Conclusion We believe our data can aid in establishing normative tomographic values and acceptable differences between both eyes. Our data may also help detect subtle corneal pathology and be useful for researchers and innovators in the field of ophthalmology.

No abstract

No abstract