Work with video display terminals among office employees. I. Subjective symptoms and discomfort.

Abstract

KNAVE BO, WIBOM RI, VOSS M, HEDSTROM LD, BEROQVIST UOV: Work with video display terminals among office employees: I Subjective symptoms and discomfort. Scand J Work En viron Health II (1985) 457-466. Subjective symptoms and discomfort were evaluated by means of a questionnaire and compared between approximately 400 video display terminal (VDT) operator s and 150 selected referents . Previous and current illnesses, educational status, and smoking and drinkin g habits were also studied. The results showed the VDT operators to have more eye discomfort and possibly also more musculoskeletal discomfort in the shoulders, neck, and back than the referents. The VDT group also reported more skin disorders. In addition, women reported consistently more disorder s than men, regardless of whether or not they were employed in VDT work . Women in general displayed greater morbidity than men. Eye discomfort, musculoskeletal discomfort, headache, and skin disorders were found to be significantly correlated in the material. The results also indicated that total daily workhou rs and time spent looking at the VDT screen were related to the degree of discomfort. Even when the subjects were divided into subgroups with reference to the various enterpri ses, the types of work and the makes of VDT, the differences obtained in the degree of discomfort appeared to be due to variations in the length of workhours.Key terms: epidemiologic study, eye discomfort, headache, musculoskeletal complaint s, skin disorders, VDT make, workho urs, workplace, worktask.Various subjective symptoms, eg , ocular discomfort, musculoskeletal complaints, and headache, have been related to work at a video display terminal (VDT) ever since the VDT was fir st introduced to worklife. (See references 1,2,8, l l , 13.) Certain facial skin disorders have also been described (9).The present epidemiologic health investigation involved about 400 VDT operators and ISO selected referen ts (ie, office employees without VDT work) in the Stockholm region. Various occupational exposure factors were measured from the screen itself, from the workstation, and from the work routine s. Subjective symptoms and d iscomforts in relation to the eyes , arms, back, and skin and headache were evaluated from questionnaires, a s well as previous and current di seases. In formation on eye status wa s obtained by means of routine ophthalmologic examinations . Certain special studies were made of accommodation, co nvergence, and refraction during the workday. Those subjects complaining of skin disorders on the face, the neck, and the hands were examined by dermatologists.The aim of the inve stigation was to compare the occurrence of subjective symptoms and discomfort between VDT operators and referents and to study the

Visual Display Terminal Use Increases the Prevalence and Risk of Work‐related Musculoskeletal Disorders among Chinese Office Workers: A Cross‐sectional Study

“…A cross-sectional study found that the percent of workers reporting ''almost daily'' neck discomfort increased monotonically with increasing hours of daily VDT use 25) . Knave et al 26) reported a relationship between hours of VDT use per day and ''musculoskeletal complaints'' for women. Rossignol et al 27) found that individuals who had 7 or more hours of daily VDT use had a significantly elevated odds ratio for musculoskeletal complaints in comparison with nonusers.…”

A field intervention examining the impact of an office ergonomics training and a highly adjustable chair on visual symptoms in a public sector organization

“…Despite the relationship between visual symptoms and computer use (Bergqvist et al, 1992;Bergqvist and Knave, 1994;Dainoff et al, 1981;Knave et al, 1985;Mocci et al, 2001;Rocha and Debert-Riberiro, 2004), little intervention research exists demonstrating how best to design and build offices to reduce visual symptoms (Aaras et al, 1998(Aaras et al, , 2001Dainoff et al, 2005aDainoff et al, , 2005bHorgen et al, 2004Horgen et al, , 2005Konarska et al, 2005). The office ergonomic intervention literature contains few well-designed interventions (NRC, 2001;Brewer et al, 2006).…”

Distal upper limb disorders and ergonomics of VDU work: a review of the epidemiological evidence

“…Six studies (1-7), that were described in 7 papers, used physical examination or objective signs for the case definition and is below designated as «primary» studies. In the remaining fourteen studies (8)(9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20)(21), constituting the «secondary» studies, only selfreported symptoms were used for the case definitions (see Table 1). The table shows the documented relationships between certain exposures and one or several of the investigated upper limb disorders.…”

“…Twelve of the fourteen «secondary» studies have data on the amount of VDU use per workday. Four of these studies (9)(10)(11)14) identified an exposure-dose/ effect relationship between VDU work and symptoms. The symptoms concerned pain or numbness in wrist, hand or fingers and, for Knave et al, musculoskeletal symptoms in general.…”