Background:The rapid increase increased, in using of video display terminals during the COVID-19 pandemic predisposes users to a variety of health problems restricted to visual problems and including various musculoskeletal problems, collectively known as computer vision syndrome (CVS) or computer vision syndrome. Aim: This study aims to ascertain university students' awareness of computer vision syndrome at Al-Baha University, including the nature, sources, accuracy, and completeness of information, as well as the attitudes towards CVS, and mitigative practices. Methods: This study used a descriptive cross-sectional design and a convenient sample of 310 (80.0% male) students drawn from Al Baha University campuses. Data were collected using self-administered questionnaires. Results:The mean age of the participants was 23.51 years (SD=5.42). The results show that 78.7%, 66.1%, and 11.6% received CVS information from social media, mass media, and family, respectfully. Despite 70% of respondents being aware of CVS manifestations, between 42% to 67% of those sampled had accurate and complete information about the meaning, causes, prevention, and management of the syndrome. More than a third of the participants had either a good (62.9%) or average (29%) total knowledge of CVS. Less than 15% had incorrect information. On average, 62.5% of respondents engaged in preventive or mitigative behaviours/activities as opposed to 37.5% who did not, but only 44% believed CVS was a serious health threat. 65.2% of the studied students had a satisfactory total practice score. The regression analysis showed that the coefficients of marital status and faculty were a statistically significant association with the total knowledge score. Conclusion: CVS awareness is acceptably high, but there is a low preventive/mitigative behaviors as well as a low realization of CVS' long-term health problems. This is why increasing CVS awareness and implementing interventions such as the 20-20-20 rule could be effective at

Aim: The purpose of this study was to compare the changes in relative peripheral refractive error produced by two different designs of progressive soft contact lenses in myopic schoolchildren. Methods: Twenty-seven myopic schoolchildren age between 13 to 15 years were included in this study. The measurements of central and peripheral refraction were made using a Grand-Seiko WR-5100K open-field autorefractometer without correction (baseline), and two different designs of progressive contact lenses (PCLs) (Multistage from SEED & Proclear from Cooper Vision) with an addition power of +1.50 D. Refractive power was measured at center and at eccentricities between 35º temporal to 35º nasal visual field (in 5º steps). Results: Both PCLs showed a reduction in hyperopic defocus at periphery. However, this reduction was only significant for the Multistage PCL (p= 0.015), (Proclear PCL p= 0.830).  Conclusion: Multistage PCLs showed greater reduction in peripheral retinal hyperopic defocus among myopic schoolchildren in comparison to Proclear PCLs.

PURPOSE: The study aimed to establish the outcome of multifocal contact lenses (MFCL) (Multistage + 1.50D and Proclear + 3.00D) on myopia progression and axial length elongation over an 18-month period. METHODS: Thirty myopic schoolchildren (5 males and 25 females) aged between 13 and 15 years were randomly assigned to wear either single vision contact lens (SVCL), Multistage MFCL + 1.50D, or Proclear +3.00D MFCL for 1½ years using a double-masked design. Cycloplegic refraction, corneal curvature, and axial length were measured. RESULTS: Myopia progression was controlled by 38.6% and 66.6% in children wearing Multistage + 1.50D and Proclear +3.00D MFCL, respectively, in comparison to children wearing SVCL over an 18-month period. In terms of axial elongation, this study found a 31.1% and 63.2% control in axial elongation over 18 months of treatment in comparison to the SVCL group. No statistical significant difference in corneal curvature was found between initial and last visits for all the three groups (SVCL, P = 0.90; Multistage + 1.50 MFCL, P = 0.78, and Proclear + 3.00 MFCL, P = 0.05). CONCLUSION: Proclear +3.00D MFCL was revealed to cause slow development of myopia and axial elongation among myopic schoolchildren. MFCL with higher add powers could be more effective on myopia progression in comparison with moderate add powers.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to determine whether the plusoptiX vision screener (PVS) can be used to detect amblyogenic risk factors (ARFs) as defined by the American Association for Paediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus Vision Screening Committee guidelines (2013) for automated vision screening devices. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, children attending a special needs school underwent screening with the PVS and complete ophthalmologic examinations. Ophthalmologic examinations were used as the gold standard to compute the prevalence, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and testability. RESULTS: Forty-four children with special needs (mean age, 8.5 years; range, 4–18 years) were included. The PVS recommended referral of 31 cases (referral rate 70%). Thirty-nine of the 44 children (89%) met the referral-positive threshold for strabismus, reduced vision and/or amblyogenic factors on examination. The plusoptiX had a sensitivity of 40% (confidence interval [CI] 7%–83%), specificity of 78% (CI 55%–85%), PPV of 15% (CI 3%–46%), and NPV of 90.3% (CI 73%–97%). The PVS underestimated refractive errors by 0.67 to 0.71 D in the right ( P < 0.001) and left eyes ( P = 0.002). Testability was relatively low, with the PVS at 75% compared to the gold standard examination at 100%. CONCLUSION: We found that although the plusoptiX photoscreener might be a useful tool in pediatric vision screening, it might not perform as well in children with intellectual disabilities. Utilization of the PVS as a single screening device may fail to identify a considerable proportion of young children with ARFs or amblyopia.

Background: Visual disorders have been reported to be higher among children with intellectual disability (ID) than among their peers without special needs; however, prevalence data on visual problems in children in Saudi Arabia are scarce. Aims: The aim of this study is to report the prevalence and causes of undiagnosed, correctable visual impairment in children with ID. Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional study of students enrolled in special educational needs schools in the western region of Saudi Arabia in April 2018. Teller visual acuity (VA) assessment and refractive errors were noted. Participants with mild to profound ID underwent detailed ophthalmologic examinations, including cycloplegic refraction, full orthoptic workup, biomicroscopy, and funduscopy. Results: A total of 61 students participated in this study. Ocular findings in decreasing prevalence were as follows: Subnormal VA (n = 41, 67.2%), refractive errors (n = 31, 51.7%), fundus anomalies (n = 13, 22%), significant strabismus (n = 9, 14.8%), abnormal head posture (n = 8, 13.3%), nystagmus (n = 3, 4.9%), anterior segment abnormality (n = 3, 4.9%), and extraocular motility abnormality (n = 2, 3.3%). Astigmatism was found in 22 cases (36.7%), followed by hyperopia (n = 13, 21.7%), myopia (n = 10, 16.7%), and anisometropia (n = 5, 8.3%). Students with syndromic ID had significantly more moderate-to-severe subnormal VA (P < 0.001) and myopic shift on cycloplegic refraction (P = 0.014 right eyes and P = 0.004 left eyes) than those with nonsyndromic ID. Conclusions: A considerable proportion of ID children have significant visual disorders. This emphasizes the need for adequate diagnostic and therapeutic national eye care services for children with ID.