Assessing the accommodation response after near visual tasks using different
            handheld electronic devices

Moulakaki, Aikaterini I; Recchioni, Alberto; Águila-Carrasco, Antonio J. Del; Esteve-Taboada, José J.; Montés‐Micó, Robert

doi:10.5935/0004-2749.20170004

Cited by 22 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Reading from smartphones and tablets at 35–40 cm for 12 and for 30 minutes resulted in a statistically significant greater lag than reading printed texts at the same distance . No significant differences in lag between digital devices such as tablets and smartphones are reported after 10 minutes of use at 25 cm viewing distance . Also, no significant difference in lag was found between a handheld e‐reader and printed text at 50 cm .…”

Section: Accommodation and Vergencementioning

confidence: 82%

Ocular and visual discomfort associated with smartphones, tablets and computers: what we do and do not know

Jaiswal

Asper

Long

et al. 2019

Clinical and Experimental Optometry

207

195

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Smartphone and tablet use in Australia and worldwide is reaching saturation levels and associated visual and ocular discomfort such as headaches, eyestrain, dry eyes and sore eyes are widespread. This review synthesises the available literature and considers these symptoms in the context of a binocular vision and/or ocular surface aetiology. Eye discomfort with smartphones and tablets is discussed alongside similar symptoms reported with desktop computer use. Handheld devices differ from computers in viewing position and distance, screen size and luminance, and patterns of use. Accommodation is altered with handheld device use, with increased lag and decreased amplitude. Smartphone and tablet use results in reduced fusional convergence and possibly a receded near point of convergence. This is similar to what happens with computer use. Findings related to blink rate with smartphone and tablet use are contradictory, perhaps due to the influence of task difficulty, and there is limited evidence related to blink amplitude. Reduced blink rate and amplitude are consistently reported with computer use. Use of handheld digital devices, like computers, may adversely impact tear stability. There is insufficient evidence to support the impact of handheld devices on tear volume, although this is reduced with computer use. The available literature does not conclusively link eye and visual discomfort symptoms reported with handheld digital devices, with changes in binocular vision, blinking or ocular surface. However, there is a gap in our understanding of symptoms which occur with smartphone and tablet use in the context of how these devices are used. In addition, studies are required in high users such as teenagers, and in patients with dry eye or accommodative/ binocular vision anomalies, all of whom may have a higher risk of symptoms. A better understanding of symptom aetiology can guide clinical advice to minimise adverse impacts on visual and ocular surface health and discomfort.

show abstract

Section: Accommodation and Vergencementioning

confidence: 82%

Ocular and visual discomfort associated with smartphones, tablets and computers: what we do and do not know

Jaiswal

Asper

Long

et al. 2019

Clinical and Experimental Optometry

207

195

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We hope that in the future there will be a study to investigate the effect of VR on children because their interpupillary distance is smaller and their amplitude of accommodation is high, so they need more concern than adult [5]. No statistically significant differences were found in the accommodation responses when reading on smartphones and tablets for 10 minutes according to [9]. The study used iPhone 4S and iPad Mini as the display to display the text for the subjects to read for 10 minutes to test for the accommodation responses.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…The resolution of iPhone 4S and Samsung Galaxy Note 8 also different whereby iPhone 4S has only 960 x 640 pixels with 326 ppi and the Samsung Galaxy Note 8 has 2960 x 1440 pixels with 552 ppi. The distance between patient's eye and the focusing point is also different; in our study we used 10 mm distance, while [9] used distance of 0.25 meter from the subjects' eyes to the screen of the smartphone. Therefore, the duration of using VR for 30 minutes with display's resolution of 552 ppi and 10 mm distance from display to the eyes did not give any significant change to accommodation of the eyes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Short Term Effect of Virtual Reality on Eye Accommodative Ability

Mukhtar¹,

Azemin²,

Ithnin³

et al. 2020

JESR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Virtual reality (VR) is a fast-growing technology in the world today. Many countries use virtual reality for many purposes such as education, military and entertainment. Despite the benefits of VR, harmful effects of VR on the users are still inconclusive. With only a few reliable studies that investigate the effect of virtual reality on the users especially on the eyes, yet still there are a lot more things we do not know about the effects of VR. The purpose of this study was to compare the amplitude of accommodation before and after watching 3-dimesional (3D) movie utilizing VR and notebook (control group). Thirty-two participants volunteered in this study and all participants underwent amplitude of accommodation (AA) test using Royal Army Force (RAF) rule before and after watching three-dimensional (3D) movie for 30 minutes using VR and two-dimensional (2D) movie by laptop. The amplitude of accommodation between pre-and post-watching 3D movie on VR was insignificantly changed (p= >0.05). The similar trend was also found after 30 minutes watching movie using laptop (p= >0.05). The utilization of VR and laptop for 30 minutes did insignificantly alter the eye accommodation.

show abstract

“…More negative or less positive refraction indicates a myopic shift, and less negative or more positive refraction indicates hypermetropic shift. Myopic refraction shift has been observed for different near work durations, as brief as 10 min and as long as 6 h, while accommodative demands for the experimental conditions varied from 8 D to 2 D [6,10,11]. Previously reported amount of NITM in individuals without vision dysfunctions has been reported from 0.11 D to 0.90 D with a mean of about 0.30 D [6,7,12].…”

Section: Near Work-induced Refraction Shiftsmentioning

confidence: 92%

Objective User Visual Experience Evaluation When Working with Virtual Pixel-Based 3D System and Real Voxel-Based 3D System

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Volumetric display shows promising implications for healthcare related applications as an innovative technology that creates real three-dimensional (3D) image by illuminating points in three-dimensional space to generate volumetric images without image separation. We used eccentric photorefractometry to objectively study ocular performance in a practical environment by evaluating near work-induced refraction shift, accommodative microfluctuations, and pupil size for 38 young adults after viewing anaglyph, and volumetric 3D content for prolonged time. The results of our study demonstrate that participants who performed relative depth estimation task on volumetric 3D content were less likely to experience task-induced myopic refraction shift. For both 3D content types, we observed pupil constriction, that is possibly related to visual fatigue. For anaglyph 3D pupil constriction, onset was observed significantly sooner, compared to volumetric 3D. Overall, sustained work with 3D content, and small disparities or the fully eliminated possibility of accommodation-vergence conflict, not only minimizes near work-induced myopic shift, but also provide beneficial accommodation relaxation that was demonstrated in this study as hypermetropic shift for nearly half of participants.

show abstract

Assessing the accommodation response after near visual tasks using different handheld electronic devices

Cited by 22 publications

References 0 publications

Ocular and visual discomfort associated with smartphones, tablets and computers: what we do and do not know

Ocular and visual discomfort associated with smartphones, tablets and computers: what we do and do not know

Short Term Effect of Virtual Reality on Eye Accommodative Ability

Objective User Visual Experience Evaluation When Working with Virtual Pixel-Based 3D System and Real Voxel-Based 3D System

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About