The vertical monitor position for presbyopic computer users with progressive lenses: how to reach clear vision and comfortable head posture

Weidling, Patrick; Jaschinski, Wolfgang

doi:10.1080/00140139.2015.1035764

Cited by 14 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As with so many presbyopia correction modalities, however, no spectacle lens is currently available capable of restoring the dynamic range of accommodation to the ageing eye. As a result, presbyopes continue to experience problems (Alvarez et al, 2017) particular in real-world environments (Konig et al, 2015), which can even result in secondary musculoskeletal symptoms (Weidling and Jaschinski, 2015) and falls (Elliott, 2014). Little research on progressive lens designs and their effectiveness in ameliorating presbyopia is published in the peer reviewed literature, with these mainly subjective trials of iterative design changes kept internal by the lens manufacturer.…”

Section: Spectaclesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Presbyopia: Effectiveness of correction strategies

Wolffsohn

Davies

2019

Progress in Retinal and Eye Research

231

178

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Presbyopia is a global problem affecting over a billion people worldwide. The prevalence of unmanaged presbyopia is as high as 50% of those over 50 years of age in developing world populations, due to a lack of awareness and accessibility to affordable treatment, and is even as high as 34% in developed countries. Definitions of presbyopia are inconsistent and varied, so we propose a redefinition that states "presbyopia occurs when the physiologically normal age-related reduction in the eye's focusing range reaches a point, when optimally corrected for distance vision, that the clarity of vision at near is insufficient to satisfy an individual's requirements". Strategies for correcting presbyopia include separate optical devices located in front of the visual system (reading glasses) or a change in the direction of gaze to view through optical zones of different optical powers (bifocal, trifocal or progressive addition spectacle lenses), monovision (with contact lenses, intraocular lenses, laser refractive surgery and corneal collagen shrinkage), simultaneous images (with contact lenses, intraocular lenses and corneal inlays), pinhole depth of focus expansion (with intraocular lenses, corneal inlays and pharmaceuticals), crystalline lens softening (with lasers or pharmaceuticals) or restored dynamics (with 'accommodating' intraocular lenses, scleral expansion techniques and ciliary muscle electrostimulation); these strategies may be applied differently to the two eyes to optimise the range of clear focus for an individual's task requirements and minimise adverse visual effects. However, none fully overcome presbyopia in all patients. While the restoration of natural accommodation or an equivalent remains elusive, guidance is given on presbyopic correction evaluation techniques.

show abstract

Section: Spectaclesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Presbyopia: Effectiveness of correction strategies

Wolffsohn

Davies

2019

Progress in Retinal and Eye Research

231

178

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…With the increasing popularity of smartphones and tablet computers, Shieh and Lee (2007) suggested that the viewing angle of touchscreen display should be between 30° and 35° below horizontal eye level, which is greater than that for conventional monitors. Recent studies have suggested that computer displays should be positioned to suit individual needs, within a moderate height range close to slightly below eye level, so as to allow for clear vision at the monitor and for a physiologically favourable head inclination (Straker et al, 2009;Weidling and Jaschinski, 2015). Therefore, the entire visual area of the display screen should be located between 0° and 60° below eye level when the user assumes the upright sitting, declined sitting, or standing reference posture, and AS-3590.2 also further recommends a maximum forward head tilt of 15° (Standards Australia, 1990).…”

Section: Viewing Angle Of Monitormentioning

confidence: 99%

Ergonomics standards and guidelines for computer workstation design and the impact on users’ health – a review

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents an overview of global ergonomics standards and guidelines for design of computer workstations, with particular focus on their inconsistency and associated health risk impact. Overall, considerable disagreements were found in the design specifications of computer workstations globally, particularly in relation to the results from previous ergonomics research and the outcomes from current ergonomics standards and guidelines. To cope with the rapid advancement in computer technology, this article provides justifications and suggestions for modifications in the current ergonomics standards and guidelines for the design of computer workstations. Practitioner Summary: A research gap exists in ergonomics standards and guidelines for computer workstations. We explore the validity and generalisability of ergonomics recommendations by comparing previous ergonomics research through to recommendations and outcomes from current ergonomics standards and guidelines.

show abstract

“…Studies that have addressed this issue are scarce and have important limitations that compromise their results. Limitations include not using validated questionnaires to measure CVS, not excluding workers with ocular disease or who are undergoing eye treatment or comparing workers with different working conditions 14,23–25 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Computer vision syndrome in presbyopic digital device workers and progressive lens design

Sánchez-Brau

Domenech

Brocal-Fernández

et al. 2021

Ophthalmic Physiologic Optic

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: To estimate the prevalence of computer vision syndrome (CVS) in presbyopic digital device workers using two ophthalmic progressive lens designs during the working day, and to analyse the association of CVS with sociodemographic, occupational, digital device exposure and refractive factors. Methods: This time series, quasi-experimental design study included 69 presbyopic digital device workers (age range: 46-69 years; mean AE SD = 54.7 AE 5.0). All used desktop computers at their workplace. Progressive addition lenses (PALs) and occupational lenses were used for three months each. CVS was measured with the CVS-Q © questionnaire before intervention (baseline) and at 1 week, 1 month and 3 months after wearing the lenses. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to identify the factors that were associated with an improved CVS-Q © score. Results: 37.7% of the subjects were female and 78.3% were ametropes; 65.2% had advanced presbyopia. 56.2% used digital devices at work >6 h day À1 . The prevalence of CVS at baseline, after wearing PALs for three months and after three months of occupational lens wear was 68.1%, 33.3% and 18.8%, respectively. The mean CVS-Q © score was lower with occupational lenses than with PALs (p = 0.001). 40.6% of the digital device workers improved their CVS-Q © score ≥2 points with the occupational lenses. Ametropes were less likely than emmetropes to improve with occupational lenses (OR = 0.27, p = 0.05). 89.8% of the sample workers were satisfied or very satisfied with the occupational lenses and 71% were similarly satisfied with the PALs. 73.9% chose the occupational lenses as their first choice of lens for digital device use, compared with 17.4% for PALs. Conclusions: Computer vision syndrome is reduced in presbyopic desktop computer workers wearing occupational lenses compared with PALs, especially in emmetropes.

show abstract

The vertical monitor position for presbyopic computer users with progressive lenses: how to reach clear vision and comfortable head posture

Abstract: For users of general-purpose progressive lenses, it is suggested that low monitor positions allow for clear vision at the monitor and for a physiologically favourable head inclination. Employees may improve their workplace using a flyer providing ergonomic-optometric information.

Cited by 14 publications

References 49 publications

Presbyopia: Effectiveness of correction strategies

Presbyopia: Effectiveness of correction strategies

Ergonomics standards and guidelines for computer workstation design and the impact on users’ health – a review

Computer vision syndrome in presbyopic digital device workers and progressive lens design

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About