ORIGINAL ARTICLE |
|
Year : 2007 | Volume
: 55
| Issue : 4 | Page : 289-293 |
|
Computer vision syndrome: A study of the knowledge, attitudes and practices in Indian Ophthalmologists
Jatinder Bali1, Neeraj Navin2, Bali Renu Thakur3
1 TNC Hospital, Tilaknagar, Delhi - 110 085, India 2 Onkarnagar Polyclinic, Onkarnagar, Delhi, India 3 Dept of Neurology, G. B. Pant Hospital, Delhi, India
Correspondence Address:
Jatinder Bali D-10, MCD Medical Complex, Kalidas Road, Gulabibagh, Delhi - 110007 India
 Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None  | Check |
DOI: 10.4103/0301-4738.33042
|
|
Purpose: To study the knowledge, attitude and practices (KAP) towards computer vision syndrome prevalent in Indian ophthalmologists and to assess whether 'computer use by practitioners' had any bearing on the knowledge and practices in computer vision syndrome (CVS).
Materials and Methods: A random KAP survey was carried out on 300 Indian ophthalmologists using a 34-point spot-questionnaire in January 2005.
Results: All the doctors who responded were aware of CVS. The chief presenting symptoms were eyestrain (97.8%), headache (82.1%), tiredness and burning sensation (79.1%), watering (66.4%) and redness (61.2%). Ophthalmologists using computers reported that focusing from distance to near and vice versa ( P =0.006, χ2 test), blurred vision at a distance ( P =0.016, χ2 test) and blepharospasm ( P =0.026, χ2 test) formed part of the syndrome. The main mode of treatment used was tear substitutes. Half of ophthalmologists (50.7%) were not prescribing any spectacles. They did not have any preference for any special type of glasses (68.7%) or spectral filters. Computer-users were more likely to prescribe sedatives/ anxiolytics ( P = 0.04, χ2 test), spectacles ( P = 0.02, χ2 test) and conscious frequent blinking ( P = 0.003, χ2 test) than the non-computer-users.
Conclusions: All respondents were aware of CVS. Confusion regarding treatment guidelines was observed in both groups. Computer-using ophthalmologists were more informed of symptoms and diagnostic signs but were misinformed about treatment modalities. |
|
|
|
[FULL TEXT] [PDF]* |
|
 |
|