不同类型视觉显示终端对视觉功能的影响

doi:10.3760/cma.j.cn115909-20210327-00121

Abstract
Figure/Table
References (17)
Related Citation (15)

Download: PDF (716 KB) HTML (1 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS) Supporting Info

Guide

Abstract Objective: To investigate the differences in visual fatigue caused by different types of visual display terminals (VDT) and their impact on visual health. Methods: This was a self-controlled study that enrolled 30 subjects, 7 males, 23 females, age 23(23, 25) years old, with an equivalent spherical lens of -3.86±2.71 D. The subjects used the digital table method to watch either a paper screen or TV screen video, one after the other, in random order. All subjects watched the video in the same environment for 30 minutes. Before and after watching the video, they filled in the Asthenopia Scale, and adjustment, aggregation, fusion and other visual function indicators were measured and the number of blinks was recorded. The comparison of the observation indicators and the data between the viewing modes was statistically analyzed by Friedman test and Wilconxon rank sum test. Results: After viewing the two screens, the blink frequency of all subjects increased, and the relative adjustment ability of the single eye and both eyes improved for those who looked closer at the screen. The score on the visual fatigue scale after watching the paper screen was significantly lower than that before watching (P=0.02) and was significantly lower than that after watching TV (χ2 =5.57, P=0.01), but there was no significant change in the scale score before and after watching the TV screen. When watching either the paper screen or TV, the median blink frequencies of subjects in front of the screen were 15.7(11.8, 17.3) and 16.9(13.1, 19.4) times/min. Median frequencies were 18.9(12.7, 20.1) and 20.4(15.3, 21.9) times/min after watching the two screens. Both screens elicited a significant increase in blinking frequency compared to before viewing (Z=2.82, P=0.01; Z=-2.27, P=0.02), but there was no significant difference between the two screens. After viewing paper-like screens, the horizontal heterophoria degree increased significantly compared to the amount before watching the screen (F=2.87, P=0.049), and was significantly greater than the amount after watching the TV screen (P=0.049). The AC/A value after watching the paper screen was lower than that after watching the TV screen (χ2 =2.99, P=0.03), but there was no significant difference from before and after watching the two screens. After watching the two screens, the positive relative accommodation ability (PRA) of the right eye, left eye and both eyes of the subjects increased compared with before viewing (F=11.01, 5.01, 10.00, P<0.05). The PRA of both eyes after watching paper-like screens at the same time was higher than watching TV screens (P=0.02). After watching a paper screen, the break point of the near-eye negative fusion (BI) and the recovery point of the far-eye positive fusion increased compared to before watching the screen (P=0.02, 0.04), but there was no obvious change in the functional parameters of fusion after watching the TV screen. Conclusions: Watching a VDT for a short time and at a medium distance can cause some visual fatigue-related index changes; different types of VDTs can have different effects on the visual function of the human eye. Watching a TV screen has less effect than watching a paper projection screen with low blue light and no flicker. The screen may be more likely to cause visual fatigue.

Key words： visual display terminal visual function visual fatigue comparative study

Received: 27 March 2021

PACS:

Fund: Capital Health Development Project-Major Project, Beijing Municipal Bureau of Health (SF-2018-1-2051); Beijing Municipal Science & Technology Commission (Z171100001017066)

Corresponding Authors: Jing Fu, Beijing Tongren Eye Center, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology & Visual Science, Beijing 100730, China (Email: fu_jing@126.com)

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors

Cite this article:

URL:

https://www.cjoovs.com/EN/10.3760/cma.j.cn115909-20210327-00121 OR https://www.cjoovs.com/EN/Y2021/V23/I8/570

[1]	Parihar JK, Jain VK, Chaturvedi P, et al. Computer and visual display terminals (VDT) vision syndrome (CVDTS). Med J Armed Forces India, 2016, 72(3): 270-276. DOI: 10.1016/ j.mjafi.2016.03.016.
[2]	中华医学会眼科学分会眼视光学组. 视疲劳诊疗专家共识 (2014年). 中华眼视光学与视觉科学杂志, 2014, 16(7): 385- 387. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1674-845X.2014.07.001.
[3]	Lee EC, Min K, Park KR, et al. Measuring the degree of eyestrain caused by watching LCD and PDP devices %J Int J Ind Ergon, 2009, 39(5): 798-806.
[4]	Lin YH, Chen CY, Lu SY, et al. Visual fatigue during VDT work: Effects of time-based and environment-based conditions. Displays, 2008, 29(5): 487-492. DOI: 10.1016/ j.displa.2008.04.003.
[5]	Sakamoto K, Aoyama S, Asahara S, et al. Evaluation of the effect of viewing distance on visual fatigue in a home viewing environment. J Hum Ergol (Tokyo), 2010, 39(1): 1-13.
[6]	吴小曼, 谌丹, 戚梦莹, 等. 不同剂量视频终端蓝光对眼表影响的量化研究. 中华眼视光学与视觉科学杂志, 2020, 22(6): 441-447. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn115909-20190903-00241.
[7]	Lee H, Whang KW. A quantitative measurement of LCD and PDP TVs for human visual preference and fatigue. Displays: Technology and Applications, 2012, 33(1): 1-6.
[8]	Portello JK, Rosenfield M, Chu CA. Blink rate, incomplete blinks and computer vision syndrome. Optom Vis Sci, 2013, 90(5): 482-487. DOI: 10.1097/OPX.0b013e31828f09a7.
[9]	Argilés M, Cardona G, Pérez-Cabré E, et al. Blink rate and incomplete blinks in six different controlled hard-copy and electronic reading conditions. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci, 2015, 56(11): 6679-6685. DOI: 10.1167/iovs.15-16967.
[10]	陈成明, 虞丽娟, 李俊, 等. LCD和OLED平板电脑引起的视觉疲劳测量对比实验研究. 工业工程与管理, 2014, 19(2): 100-106. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-5429.2014.02.016.
[11]	Kaneko K, Sakamoto K. Spontaneous blinks as a criterion of visual fatigue during prolonged work on visual display terminals. Percept Mot Skills, 2001, 92(1): 234-250. DOI: 10.2466/pms.2001.92.1.234.
[12]	Skotte JH, Nøjgaard JK, Jørgensen LV, et al. Eye blink frequency during different computer tasks quantified by electrooculography. Eur J Appl Physiol, 2007, 99(2): 113-119. DOI: 10.1007/s00421-006-0322-6.
[13]	苏晶, 刘新泉. VDT操作者双眼视功能参数的测定及其与视疲劳的关系. 眼科, 2016, 25(2): 110-114. DOI: 10.13281/j.cnki. issn.1004-4469.2016.02.010.
[14]	瞿小妹, 褚仁远, 汪琳, 等. 注视视频终端对视觉功能的影响.中华眼科杂志, 2005, 41(11): 986-989. DOI: 10.3760/j:issn: 0412-4081.2005.11.007.
[15]	蓝敏, 杨旭波, 刘陇黔. 投影与液晶电视引起视疲劳的初步对比研究. 中华眼科杂志, 2019, 55(8): 595-600. DOI: 10.3760/ cma.j.issn.0412-4081.2019.08.009.
[16]	Mandelbaum J. An accommodation phenomenon. Arch Ophthalmol, 1960, 63: 923-926. DOI: 10.1001/archopht.1960. 00950020925005.
[17]	Collins M, Davis B, Atchison D. VDT screen reflections and accommodation response. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt, 1994, 14(2): 193-198. DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-1313.1994.tb00108.x.

[1]	. [J]. Chinese Journal of Optometry Ophthalmology and Visual science, 2023, 25(8): 0-.