Self-Reported Student Awareness and Prevalence of Computer Vision Syndrome During COVID-19 Pandemic at Al-Baha University

Figures & data

Table 1 The Frequency Distribution of Studied Students Regarding Their Personal Characteristics’ (n=310)

	Demographics	Percent (%)
Age	18-<21	41.9
	21-<26	48.1
	26-<30	5.8
	30+	4.2
Sex	Male	80
	Female	20
Marital Status	Married	83.9
	Single	14.8
	Divorced	1.3
Academic Year	First	10
	Second	33.3
	Third	23.3
	Fourth	21.6
	Fifth	7.1
	Sixth	4.9
Residence	Urban	13.5
	Rural	86.5

Figure 1 Percentage distribution of studied students regarding their faculty (n=310).

Figure 2 Percentage distribution of studied students regarding their source of information computer vision syndrome (n=310).

Table 2 Frequency Distribution of Studied Students Regarding Their Knowledge About Computer Vision Syndrome (n=310)

Items	Complete and Correct	Incomplete but Correct	Incorrect Information
Meaning of computer vision syndrome	42.9%	42.6%	14.5%
Causes of computer vision syndrome	60.0%	35.5%	4.5%
Factors of computer vision syndrome	65.2%	23.9%	11.0%
Signs and symptoms of computer vision syndrome	70.3%	23.2%	6.5%
Treatment of computer vision syndrome	47.4%	47.1%	5.5%
Prevention of computer vision syndrome	67.7%	25.8%	6.5%

Table 3 Statistically Relation Between Total Knowledge Level and Personal Characteristics Among Studied Students

	Demographics	Poor (n=25)	Average (n=90)	Good (n=195)	Chi^2	p-value
Age	18-<21	48%	40%	42.1%	3.41	0.756
	21-<26	44%	45.6%	49.7%
	26-<30	4%	7.8%	5.1%
	30+	4%	6.7%	3.1%
Sex	Female	88%	73.3%	82.1%	4.013	0.134
	Male	12%	26.7%	17.9%
Marital Status	Single	76%	83.3%	85.1%	9.967	0.041*
	Married	16%	15.6%	14.4%
	Divorced	8%	1.1%	0.5%
Faculty	Medical	20%	40%	42.6%	14.425	0.006**
	Sciences	68%	34.4%	29.7%
	Arts	12%	25.6%	27.7%
Academic Year	First	8%	11.1%	9.7%	14.423	0.155
	Second	28%	41.1%	30.3%
	Third	20%	18.9%	25.6%
	Fourth	20%	23.3%	21%
	Fifth	8%	3.3%	8.7%
	Sixth	16%	2.2%	4.6%
Residence	Urban	16%	16.7%	11.8%	1.387	0.5
	Rural	84%	83.3%	88.2

Note: * and **Denote statistical significance at 5% and 1% levels, respectively.

Table 4 Frequency Distribution of Studied Students Regarding Their Practices Toward Computer Vision Syndrome (n=310)

Items	Done	Not Done	Total
	%	%	%
Check the position of your digital display	60.0	40.0	100
Adjust the lighting	76.5	23.5	100
Adjust your seating	57.7	42.3	100
Take regular eye breaks.	62.3	37.7	100
Upgrade your screen	48.7	51.3	100
Exercise your eyes	55.8	44.2	100
Blink	76.5	23.5	100

Table 5 Frequency Distribution of Studied Students Regarding Their Attitude Toward Computer Vision Syndrome (n=310)

Items	Agree	Neutral	Disagree
	%	%	%
Working close to someone with CVS	26.5	34.5	39.0
Losing sight due to CVS	27.7	42.9	29.4
Identifying CVS sufferers by the appearance	28.4	36.1	35.5
Being concerned about CVS only when symptoms are severe	52.6	26.1	21.3
Any person is in danger of getting CVS	63.2	25.8	11.0
Correct use of computers can prevent one from developing CVS	64.5	28.7	6.8
CVS awareness helps one avoid developing it	67.7	21.6	10.6
One can only know they have CVS if they see an eye specialist	41.0	38.4	20.6
One can lose a job if he/she tells others they have CVS	27.4	32.6	40.0

Table 6 Statistically Relation Between Total Practices Level and Personal Characteristics Among Studied Students

		Unsatisfactory (n=108)	Satisfactory (n=202)	Chi^2	p-value
Age	18-<21	54.6%	35.1%	14.619	0.002**
	21-<26	41.7%	51.5%
	26-<30	2.8%	7.4%
	30+	0.9%	5.9%
Sex	Female	87%	76.2%	5.13	0.024*
	Male	13%	23.8%
Marital Status	Single	94.4%	78.2%	13.974	0.001
	Married	5.6%	19.8%
	Divorced	0%	2%
Faculty	Medical	38.9%	40.6%	0.636	0.728
	Sciences	37%	32.7%
	Arts	24.1%	26.7%
Academic Year	First	7.4%	11.4%	33.099	0.000**
	Second	30.6%	22.3%
	Third	3.7%	10.4%
	Fourth	28.7%	18.8%
	Fifth	1.9%	0.5%
	Sixth	13%	23.3%
Residence	Urban	14.8%	12.9%	0.227	0.634
	Rural	85.2%	87.1%

Note: * and **Denote statistical significance at 5% and 1% levels, respectively.

Table 7 Statistically Relation Between Total Attitude Level and Personal Characteristics Among Studied Students

	Demographics	Negative (n=145)	Positive (n=165)	X^2	p-value
Age	18-<21	44.8%	39.4%	1.347	0.718
	21-<26	45.5%	50.3%
	26-<30	6.2%	5.5%
	30+	3.4%	4.8%
Sex	Female	77.9%	81.8%	0.729	0.393
	Male	22.1%	18.2%
Marital Status	Single	84.8%	83%	1.863	0.394
	Married	13.1%	16.4%
	Divorced	2.1%	0.6%
Faculty	Medical	42.1%	38.2%	2.804	0.246
	Sciences	36.6%	32.1%
	Arts	21.4%	29.7%
Academic Year	First	9.7%	10.3%	0.77	0.979
	Second	34.5%	32.1%
	Third	23.4%	23%
	Fourth	20%	23%
	Fifth	6.9%	7.3%
	Sixth	5.5%	4.2%
Residence	Urban	14.5%	12.7%	0.203	0.652
	Rural	85.5%	87.3%

Table 8 Correlation Matrix Between Total Level Knowledge, Practices, and Attitude Among Studied Students

	Total Knowledge	Total Practices	Total Attitude
Total knowledge	1
Total practices	0.086	1
Total attitude	−0.448*	0.225**	1

Note: * and **Denote statistical significance at 5% and 1% levels, respectively.