June 2022
Volume 63, Issue 7
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2022
The Effect of Ophthalmic Blue Blocker Lenses and Anti-Reflective Coats on Digital Reading Efficiency and Comfort
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Christina Wentz
    Illinois College of Optometry, Chicago, Illinois, United States
  • Janis Winters
    Illinois College of Optometry, Chicago, Illinois, United States
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Christina Wentz None; Janis Winters None
  • Footnotes
    Support  Illinois College of Optometry
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science June 2022, Vol.63, 4216 – A0144. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Christina Wentz, Janis Winters; The Effect of Ophthalmic Blue Blocker Lenses and Anti-Reflective Coats on Digital Reading Efficiency and Comfort. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2022;63(7):4216 – A0144.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : With increasing time spent on devices, there is rising interest in the use of blue light blocking (BB) lenses to reduce symptoms of digital eye strain. Current research is conflicted about the benefits use of these lenses might have and on what components of eye strain these may be. We conducted an experiment to compare the effects, if any, commercially available BB and/or antireflective (AR) coatings may have relative to a coating-free control on eye movements, reading rate, and subjective assessments of digital eye strain symptoms.

Methods : Twenty-eight emmetropic or contact lens corrected subjects (ages 22-31 years old; 10 male, 18 female) completed pursuit, saccade, and fixation assessments via the RightEye Dynamic Vision test while wearing clear, un-tinted BB, AR, BB/AR, and control (coating-free) lenses in a randomized order. They then completed a 20-minute reading task while wearing each of the lenses and filled out a questionnaire regarding their eye strain symptoms. Analysis of variance tests were used for statistical analysis and a p value of 0.05 was considered significant.

Results : Pursuits, saccades, and fixations were not significantly different between the control and any of the treatment lens options (p_pursuits = 0.39, p_saccades = 0.91, and p_fixations = 0.89). Similarly, there was no significant percent change in the reading rate for any of the treatments relative to the control (p_reading = 0.44). The subjective eye strain symptom survey found statistically insignificant differences in score for all of the questioned symptoms. These included blurred vision while viewing the text (p = 0.45), blurred vision at distance after the task (p = 0.49), difficulty/slowness refocusing eyes after the task (p = 0.96), irritated or burning eyes (p = 0.71), dry eyes (p = 0.78), eye strain (p = 0.94), headache (p = 0.65), tired eyes (p = 0.56), sensitivity to bright lights (p = 0.65), and discomfort in the eyes (p = 0.74).

Conclusions : We find no statistical evidence to support claims that BB lenses with or without AR coat or AR coats alone will improve digital eye strain symptoms. This finding is consistent with other studies using the same symptom questionnaire. Additionally, we find no support for these lenses and coatings to alter eye movements or change reading rate significantly.

This abstract was presented at the 2022 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in Denver, CO, May 1-4, 2022, and virtually.

×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×