Comparison of progressive addition lenses for general purpose and for computer vision: an office field study

References

• Rosenfield M. Computer vision syndrome: a review of ocular causes and potential treatments. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2011; 31: 502–515.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sullivan CM, Fowler CW. Analysis of a progressive addition lens population. Ophthal Physiol Opt 1989; 9: 163–170.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sheedy JE. Progressive addition lenses–matching the specific lens to patient needs. Optometry 2004; 75: 83–102.
   Google Scholar
• Sheedy JE. Correlation analysis of the optics of progressive addition lenses. Optom Vis Sci 2004; 81: 350–361.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Menozzi M, Bergande E, Sury P. Evaluation of progressive lenses by means of a field study. Z Arb Wiss 2008; 62: 200–209.
   Google Scholar
• Sheedy J, Hardy RF, Hayes JR. Progressive addition lenses–measurements and ratings. Optometry 2006; 77: 23–39.
   Google Scholar
• Alvarez TL, Han S, Kania C, Eun K, Tsang O, Semmlow JL, Granger‐donetti B et al. Adaptation to progressive lenses by presbyopes. In: Neural Engineering, 2009 NER '09 4th International IEEE/EMBS Conference, 2009. p 143–146.
   Google Scholar
• Han SJ, Alvarez TL, Semmlow JL, Ciuffreda KJ, Pedrono C. Entropy analysis on vergence eye movement data for progressive lens acceptability in presbyopia. In: Bioengineering Conference, 2007 NEBC '07 IEEE 33rd Annual Northeast, 2007. p 150–151.
   Google Scholar
• Han SJ, Semmlow JL, Granger‐donnetti B, Alvarez TL. Convergence dynamics as an indicator for progressive addition lens acceptability among presbyopes. In: Bioengineering Conference, 2009 IEEE 35th Annual Northeast, 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Kania C, Tsang O, Eun K, Granger‐donnetti B, Alvarez TL. Motor learning discerning progressive lens acceptability in presbyopes. In: Bioengineering Conference, 2009 IEEE 35th Annual Northeast, 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Tsang O, Eun K, Granger‐donetti B, Semmlow JL, Alvarez TL. Saccade correlation to adaptation of progressive lens amongst presbyopes. In: Bioengineering Conference, Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE 36th Annual Northeast, 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson L, Buckley JG, Scally AJ, Elliott DB. Multifocal spectacles increase variability in toe clearance and risk of tripping in the elderly. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2007; 48: 1466–1471.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Timmis MA, Johnson L, Elliott DB, Buckley JG. Use of single‐vision distance spectacles improves landing control during step descent in well‐adapted multifocal lens‐wearers. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2010; 51: 3903–3908.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lord SR, Dayhew J, Howland A. Multifocal glasses impair edge‐contrast sensitivity and depth perception and increase the risk of falls in older people. J Am Geriatrics Soc 2002; 50: 1760–1766.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Han Y, Ciuffreda KJ, Selenow A, Ali SR. Dynamic interactions of eye and head movements when reading with single‐vision and progressive lenses in a simulated computer‐based environment. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2003; 44: 1534–1545.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Han Y, Ciuffreda KJ, Selenow A, Bauer E, Ali SR, Spencer W. Static aspects of eye and head movements during reading in a simulated computer‐based environment with single‐vision and progressive lenses. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2003; 44: 145–153.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hutchings N, Irving EL, Jung N, Dowling LM, Wells KA, Lillakas L. Eye and head movement alterations in naive progressive addition lens wearers. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2007; 27: 142–153.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friedrich M, Kothe J, Seidel E, Beyer L. Relation between head and eye movement and neck and shoulder complaints in presbyopic VDU users. Int Musculoskeletal Med 2014; 36: 26–31.
   Google Scholar
• Mateo B, Porcar‐seder R, Solaz JS, Dursteler JC. Experimental procedure for measuring and comparing head‐neck‐trunk posture and movements caused by different progressive addition lens designs. Ergonomics 2010; 53: 904–913.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Selenow A, Bauer EA, Ali SR, Spencer LW, Ciuffreda KJ. Assessing visual performance with progressive addition lenses. Optom Vis Sci 2002; 79: 502–505.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Han SC, Graham AD, Lin MC. Clinical assessment of a customized free‐form progressive add lens spectacle. Optom Vis Sci 2011; 88: 234–243.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sheedy JE, Hardy RF. The optics of occupational progressive lenses. Optometry 2005; 76: 432–441.
   Google Scholar
• Minkwitz G. [On the surface astigmatism of a fixed symmetrical aspheric surface]. Optica acta 1963; 10: 223–227.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Allie P, Bartha MC, Kokot D, Purvis C. A field observation of display placement requirements for presbyopic and prepresbyopic computer users. Hum Fac Erg Soc P 2010; 54: 709–713.
   Google Scholar
• Horgen G, Aaras A, Fagerthun H, Larsen S. Is there a reduction in postural load when wearing progressive lenses during VDT work over a three‐month period? Appl Ergon 1995; 26: 165–171.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horgen G, Aaras A, Kaiser H, Thoresen M. Do specially designed visual display unit lenses create increased postural load compared with single‐vision lenses during visual display unit work? Optom Vis Sci 2002; 79: 112–120.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horgen G, Aaras A, Thoresen M. Will visual discomfort among visual display unit (VDU) users change in development when moving from single vision lenses to specially designed VDU progressive lenses? Optom Vis Sci 2004; 81: 341–349.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jaschinski W, König M, Mekontso TM, Ohlendorf A, Welscher M. Computer vision syndrome in presbyopia and beginning presbyopia: effects of spectacle lens type. Clin Exp Optom 2014. In press.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• König M, Haensel C, Jaschinski W. How to place a computer monitor: measurements of vertical zones of clear vision with presbyopia corrections. Clin Exp Optom 2014; submitted.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meinert M, König M, Jaschinski W. Web‐based office ergonomic intervention on work‐related complaints—A Field Study. Ergonomics 2013: 56: 1658–1668.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Menozzi M, von Buol A, Itschner L, Saluz L, Krueger H. Die Eignung verschiedener cephalometrischer Bezugslinien für die Bestimmung der vertikalen Ausrichtung des Kopfes. [The suitability of various cephalometric planes for the determination of vertical alignment of the head]. Z Morphol Anthropol 1996; 81: 205–215.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Grissom RJ, Kim JJ. Effect Sizes for Research: Univariate and Multivariate Application. New York: Taylor and Francis, 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Wessa P. Bias Reduced Logistic Regression (v1.0.4) in Free Statistics Software (v1.1.23‐r7), Office for Research Development and Education, URL http://www.wessa.net/rwasp_logisticregression.wasp/.
   Google Scholar
• Peduzzi P, Concato J, Kemper E, Holford TR, Feinstein AR. A simulation study of the number of events per variable in logistic regression analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 1996; 49: 1373–1379.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allie P, Kokot D, Purvis C, Bartha MC. Computer display placement for progressive addition lens wearers: a field observation of multiple display conditions. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting 2009; 53: 493–497.
   Google Scholar
• Allie P, Purvis C, Kokot D. Computer display viewing angles: Is it time to shed a few degrees? In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 49th Annual Meeting: Sage, 2005. p 798.
   Google Scholar
• Masseida J, Perske F, Jaschinski W. Conditions of physiologically favourable gaze inclination. Z Arb Wiss 2013; 67: 221–231.
   Google Scholar
• Menozzi M, von Buol A, Krueger H, Miege C. Direction of gaze and comfort: discovering the relation for the ergonomic optimization of visual tasks. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 1994; 14: 393–399.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sommerich CM, Joines SM, Psihogios JP. Effects of computer monitor viewing angle and related factors on strain, performance and preference outcomes. Hum Factors 2001; 43: 39–55.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Masseida J, Philip J, Wicher C, Jaschinski W. Several indicators of the physiological favourable head inclination. Z Arb Wiss 2013; 67: 208–219.
   Google Scholar
• Jampel RS, Shi DX. The primary position of the eyes, the resetting saccade, and the transverse visual head plane. Head movements around the cervical joints. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1992; 33: 2501–2510.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ankrum DR, Nemeth KJ. Head and neck posture at computer workstations—What's neutral? In: Society THFaE ed. 14th Triennial Congress of the International Ergonomics Association. San Diego, California, USA: Santa Monica: The Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 2000. p 565–568.
   Google Scholar
• Long J, Helland M. A multidisciplinary approach to solving computer related vision problems. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2012; 32: 429–435.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Long J, Helland M, Anshel J. A vision for strengthening partnerships between optometry and ergonomics. In: Mitchell R ed. HFESA 47th Annual Conference 2011, Synergy in Sydney: Creating and Maintaining Partnerships. Crows Nest, Australia: Curran Associates, Inc, 2011. p 57.
   Google Scholar
• Helland M, Horgen G, Kvikstad TM, Garthus T, Bruenech JR, Aaras A. Musculoskeletal, visual and psychosocial stress in VDU operators after moving to an ergonomically designed office landscape. Appl Ergon 2008; 39: 284–295.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anshel JR. Visual Ergonomics Handbook. Boca Ratoon, Florida, USA: CRC Taylor & Francis, 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Hayes JR, Sheedy JE, Stelmack JA, Heaney CA. Computer use, symptoms and quality of life. Optom Vis Sci 2007; 84: 738–744.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Portello JK, Rosenfield M, Bababekova Y, Estrada JM, Leon A. Computer‐related visual symptoms in office workers. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2012; 32: 375–382.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barnett AG, van der Pols JC, Dobson AJ. Regression to the mean: what it is and how to deal with it. Int J Epidemiol 2005; 34: 215–220.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar