Accommodation Response Variations in University Students under High Demand for Near-Vision Activity

Abstract

The objective of this study was to investigate accommodation changes and visual discomfort in a university student population after a period of high demand for near-vision activity. A total of 50 university students aged between 20 and 22 years were recruited. The tests performed involved positive relative accommodation (PRA), negative relative accommodation (NRA), accommodation amplitude (AA), and monocular and binocular accommodative facility (MAF and BAF). Visual discomfort was measured on a scale involving a visual discomfort questionnaire (VDQ). All accommodative variables underwent changes during the exam period; specifically, regarding NRA and PRA, 30.4% and 15.1% of the studied population, respectively, appeared to be below average. Moreover, 42.3% of the population exhibited values below average in the second measure of AA. On the other hand, a small percentage of the population was below average in MAF and BAF measurements: 3% in the monocular right eye test, 6% in the left eye test, and 9.1% in the binocular facility test. Finally, the VDQ score did not reveal a statistically significant difference between the two measurements. Prolonged near-distance work, such as a university exams period, changed all accommodation systems (amplitude of accommodation, relative accommodation, and accommodation facility). These changes influence an accommodation excess that results in blurred vision, headache, and problems with focusing.

Accommodative response and visual fatigue following a non‐congruent visual task in non‐asthenopic and asthenopic individuals

“…11,34,54 These results are similar to those reported by Seo. 13 and De-Hita-Cantalejo et al, 17 who also showed significant reductions in NRA of 0.25 0.90 D, respectively, after prolonged periods near vision among healthy young subjects. The results of the present study were higher than the normative values from clinical guidelines (2.00 ± 0.50 D) 34 in both periods, but this difference was not clinically relevant.…”

“…Furthermore, previously published studies are inconsistent regarding the impact of near activities on optometric oculomotor tests, and findings vary greatly from one study to another. For example, nine studies compared the binocular accommodative amplitude using the push‐up method before and after different near vision activities (e.g., reading, watching video, exam period) for durations ranging from 30 min to 4 months using different methods of presentation (e.g., book, smartphone, computer) in non‐presbyopic adults 11,13–15,17,19–22 . The mean difference between the pre‐ and post‐task measurements was 0.63 D, ranging from an increase of 0.65 D (closer near‐point) to a decrease of −1.05 D (recession of the near‐point), and the differences were not statistically significant.…”

“…Optometric tests have the advantage that they can provide a diagnosis of the patient's oculomotor health, and can be included in clinical routines. 10 While tests of accommodative facility (e.g., the binocular/monocular flipper test), [11][12][13][14][15][16] accommodative amplitude, [12][13][14][15]17,18 negative or positive relative accommodation 11,[13][14][15]17 and accommodative error 11,[13][14][15] identify signs of accommodative dysfunction commonly associated with asthenopia, they have some limitations, notably requiring subjective responses (e.g., blur perception, endpoint criteria), which might lead to methodological bias. Furthermore, previously published studies are inconsistent regarding the impact of near activities on optometric oculomotor tests, and findings vary greatly from one study to another.…”

“…For example, nine studies compared the binocular accommodative amplitude using the push-up method before and after different near vision activities (e.g., reading, watching video, exam period) for durations ranging from 30 min to 4 months using different methods of presentation (e.g., book, smartphone, computer) in non-presbyopic adults. 11,[13][14][15]17,[19][20][21][22] The mean difference between the pre-and post-task measurements was 0.63 D, ranging from an increase of 0.65 D (closer near-point) to a decrease of −1.05 D (recession of the near-point), and the differences were not statistically significant. These discrepancies are probably due to differences in methodology between experiments, or variations in the repeatability and accuracy of the tests.…”

Prevalence of Near-Vision-Related Symptoms in a University Population

“…The high visual demands required in an academic environment may justify the higher prevalence in this group of subjects. A previous study also reported changes in several accommodative parameters in university students after the university exams period, resulting in blurred vision, headache and problems with focusing [ 33 ].…”