Background: Asthenopia or eye strain is one of the major medical problems that students face during their academic years. Objectives: The aim of this study is to determine the prevalence of asthenopia among a sample of university students attending various majors and to identify the risk factors for its development. Methods: This is a cross sectional study conducted on students attending various faculties at the American University of Beirut during the spring semester of 2019. Students were asked to fill a self-administered anonymous questionnaire that inquired about demographics, use of digital devices, symptoms of asthenopia, possible risk factors and protective measures. A bivariate analysis was performed to correlate asthenopia with the different variables. A multivariate analysis was then conducted to determine the extent of contribution of the different variables to asthenopia after controlling for confounding variables. Results: The prevalence of asthenopia was found to be 67.8% with blurred vision being the most reported symptom (27.0%). A bivariate analysis was used to assess the association between asthenopia and the following variables: demographics, digital device use, reasons for using digital devices, and preventive methods. Age, being a continuous variable, was analyzed using an independent t- test. For the variables that were found to be have a p-value < 0.2, a multiple logistic regression was performed. Old age was found to be a protective factor for asthenopia, with 0.693 times reduction in asthenopia for every increase in year of age. Using the device for communication for less than four hours ( p =0.012), using the device for less than four hours per day ( p =0.000) and pattern of using the device for less than three years ( p =0.023) were significant in being negatively associated with asthenopia. As for preventative measures that protect users from digital eyestrain, we found that using eye drops ( p =0.004; OR=0.375) and taking regular breaks ( p =0.000; OR= 0.399) were protective factors whereas using adjustable screens was a risk factor ( p =0.000; OR=3.083). Conclusion: Asthenopia was found to be of non-negligible prevalence among this sample of university students. The results of this study highlight the importance of establishing awareness campaigns and encourage the introduction of targeted screenings for asthenopia among college students.

IntroductionReports of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C), following severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, have been increasing worldwide, with an incidence varying significantly across studies based on the definition used for the diagnosis. At our tertiary medical center in Lebanon, we encountered several cases that presented a diagnostic challenge because they mimicked MIS-C but did not meet the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) definition. We decided to review these cases and describe their features in comparison with cases that met the CDC criteria of MIS-C and those that had an alternative diagnosis.MethodsThis is a retrospective chart review of subjects aged &lt;19 years old admitted to the American University of Beirut Medical Center (AUBMC) between March 1, 2020, and May 31, 2021, with suspected or confirmed MIS-C, following documented COVID-19 infection, with sufficient or insufficient criteria for diagnosis. Subjects were classified into 3 groups: “MIS-C”, “Near MIS-C” and “Alternative Diagnosis”.ResultsA total number of 29 subjects were included in our cohort. Fever was present in all subjects. In the MIS-C group, evidence for cardiovascular system involvement was the most common feature followed by the mucocutaneous and gastrointestinal systems. In the “Near MIS-C” and “Alternative Diagnosis” group, gastrointestinal symptoms were the most common with only one patient with cardiac abnormalities and none with coagulopathy. Subjects with typical MIS-C presentation had higher inflammatory markers when compared to subjects in the other groups. Almost all the subjects had positive IgG for SARS-CoV-2. Of the 29 subjects, the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health (RCPCH) case definition would have identified all suspected cases without an alternative diagnosis as MIS-C, whereas the World Health Organization (WHO) and the CDC definitions would have excluded 6 and 10 subjects, respectively.ConclusionMIS-C presents a diagnostic challenge due to the nonspecific symptoms, lack of pathognomonic findings, and potentially fatal complications. More research is needed to fully understand its pathogenesis, clinical presentation spectrum, and diagnostic criteria. Based on our experience, we favor the hypothesis that MIS-C has a continuum of severity that necessitates revisiting and unifying the current definitions.