Low-energy light bulbs, computers, tablets and the blue light hazard

O’Hagan, John; Khazova, Marina; Price, Luke

doi:10.1038/eye.2015.261

Cited by 160 publications

(131 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

122

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The rationale for blue light‐inducing retinal injury derives primarily from animal model and cell culture studies, where retinal changes have been reported following exposure to high intensity blue light. More recently, O'Hagan et al . investigated blue light exposure from electronic devices, such as computer screens and mobile phones, and noted that the amount of blue light emitted from these devices was almost 1000‐fold less than the levels in natural daylight.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Insights into Australian optometrists’ knowledge and attitude towards prescribing blue light‐blocking ophthalmic devices

Singh

Anderson

Downie

2019

Ophthalmic Physiologic Optic

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The aim of this cross‐sectional study was to survey Australian optometrists regarding their attitudes towards, and knowledge of, blue light‐blocking lenses designed to attenuate blue light transmission to the eye. Methods A 29‐item survey was distributed at a major national optometry education conference and through professional networks. Respondents provided information regarding their demographics and practice modalities, knowledge about the potential effects of blue light, and attitudes towards prescribing blue light‐blocking ophthalmic devices. Ordinal logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the factors that predicted optometrists’ prescribing of blue light‐blocking lenses. Results Of 372 respondents, 75.3% indicated prescribing blue light‐blocking spectacle lenses in their clinical practice. Forty‐four per cent of optometrists considered daily environmental exposure to blue light as a potential cause of retinal damage, and approximately half of respondents thought blue light emitted from computer screens was an important factor in causing computer vision syndrome. About half of optometrists considered placebo effects to potentially play a role, at least sometimes, in patients’ experiences with blue light‐blocking lenses. Most optometrists estimated that they first prescribed a blue light‐blocking lens in 2016. The most common reason optometrists prescribed these devices was for patients who were computer or electronic device users (87.9%). The two main sources of information used to guide practitioners’ management approaches were conference presentations and manufacturer product information. Practitioners were significantly more likely to prescribe blue light‐blocking lenses if they considered blue light to cause either retinal damage (odds ratio, OR 2.28, 95%CI 1.34–3.88, p = 0.002) or computer vision syndrome (OR 2.52, 95%CI 1.41–4.50, p = 0.002) compared with practitioners who did not consider such factors to be relevant. Conclusion Prescribing trends by Australian optometrists in relation to blue light‐blocking lenses reflect the inconclusive nature of several aspects of the evidence in this field. Blue light‐blocking lens prescribing has increased since 2010, despite practitioners acknowledging the lack of high‐quality evidence to support their use and also commonly believing that placebo effects may have a role in patient responses to these lenses. Information from this study will help inform the development of resources to guide evidence‐based prescribing of blue light‐blocking lens products.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Insights into Australian optometrists’ knowledge and attitude towards prescribing blue light‐blocking ophthalmic devices

Singh

Anderson

Downie

2019

Ophthalmic Physiologic Optic

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Finally, the weighted values were summed to give the irradiance for comparison with the guideline exposure limit. It was found that under even extreme long‐term viewing conditions, none of the assessed sources exceeded the guideline limits and therefore extensive exposure to digital device‐emitted radiation should not raise concerns for public eye health . However, these devices are known to emit strongly in the short‐wavelength part of the visible spectrum and blue light is currently considered to have the strongest effect in synchronizing human circadian rhythm .…”

Section: Digital Age and Eye Healthmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ultraviolet radiation oxidative stress affects eye health

Ivanov

Mappes

Schaupp

et al. 2018

Journal of Biophotonics

152

132

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the eye, ultraviolet radiation (UVR) is not known to contribute to visual perception but to mainly damage multiple structures. UVR carries higher energy than visible light and high dose exposure to UVR causes direct cellular damage, which has an important role in the development of cancer. This review provides an overview on the most recent knowledge on the role of UVR in oxidative stress (OS) in relation to noncancer ocular pathologies: various corneal pathologies, cataract, glaucoma and age-related macular degeneration. Possible OS signaling streams and mechanisms in the aging eye are discussed. Excessive exposure to UVR through live may seriously contribute to increase in OS of various eye tissues and thus lead to the advancement of serious ocular pathologies. Children are especially vulnerable to UVR because of their larger pupils and more transparent ocular media: up to 80% of a person's lifetime exposure to UVR is reached before the age of 18. Therefore, efficient everyday protection of the sensitive tissues of the eye by wearing of sunglasses, clear UVR-blocking spectacles or contact lenses should be considered from early age on. Many initiatives are taken worldwide to inform and raise the population's awareness about these possible UVR hazards to the eye.

show abstract

“…[17] With the increasing popularity of blue-rich LED-backlight display devices, such as mobile smartphones, ultraportable tablets, and computer screens, our eyes are exposed to more blue light than in the past. There has been a surge of new ophthalmic aids including intraocular lenses[18] and spectacle lenses designed with a rationale to protect the eyes from potential photochemical damages.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Blue-Light Filtering Spectacle Lenses: Optical and Clinical Performances

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposesTo evaluate the optical performance of blue-light filtering spectacle lenses and investigate whether a reduction in blue light transmission affects visual performance and sleep quality.MethodsExperiment 1: The relative changes in phototoxicity, scotopic sensitivity, and melatonin suppression of five blue-light filtering plano spectacle lenses were calculated based on their spectral transmittances measured by a spectrophotometer. Experiment 2: A pseudo-randomized controlled study was conducted to evaluate the clinical performance of two blue-light filtering spectacle lenses (BF: blue-filtering anti-reflection coating; BT: brown-tinted) with a regular clear lens (AR) serving as a control. A total of eighty computer users were recruited from two age cohorts (young adults: 18–30 yrs, middle-aged adults: 40–55 yrs). Contrast sensitivity under standard and glare conditions, and colour discrimination were measured using standard clinical tests. After one month of lens wear, subjective ratings of lens performance were collected by questionnaire.ResultsAll tested blue-light filtering spectacle lenses theoretically reduced the calculated phototoxicity by 10.6% to 23.6%. Although use of the blue-light filters also decreased scotopic sensitivity by 2.4% to 9.6%, and melatonin suppression by 5.8% to 15.0%, over 70% of the participants could not detect these optical changes. Our clinical tests revealed no significant decrease in contrast sensitivity either with (95% confidence intervals [CI]: AR–BT [–0.05, 0.05]; AR–BF [–0.05, 0.06]; BT–BF [–0.06, 0.06]) or without glare (95% CI: AR–BT [–0.01, 0.03]; AR–BF [–0.01, 0.03]; BT–BF [–0.02, 0.02]) and colour discrimination (95% CI: AR–BT [–9.07, 1.02]; AR–BF [–7.06, 4.46]; BT–BF [–3.12, 8.57]).ConclusionBlue-light filtering spectacle lenses can partially filter high-energy short-wavelength light without substantially degrading visual performance and sleep quality. These lenses may serve as a supplementary option for protecting the retina from potential blue-light hazard.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02821403

show abstract

Low-energy light bulbs, computers, tablets and the blue light hazard

Cited by 160 publications

References 6 publications

Insights into Australian optometrists’ knowledge and attitude towards prescribing blue light‐blocking ophthalmic devices

Insights into Australian optometrists’ knowledge and attitude towards prescribing blue light‐blocking ophthalmic devices

Ultraviolet radiation oxidative stress affects eye health

Blue-Light Filtering Spectacle Lenses: Optical and Clinical Performances

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About