Current eye research · 2021
Differences in Visual Working and Mobile Phone Usage Distance according to the Job Profile.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Soler Fernando, Sánchez-García Alicia, Molina-Martin Ainhoa, de Fez Dolores, Díaz Valentín, Piñero David P
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To analyze and characterize the pattern of visual working distance (WD) and mobile phone usage distance (MPD) in a large population, analyzing the differences in these parameters according to the job profile.
METHODS: Cross-sectional study consisting of a screening campaign evaluating the visual status of professionals from seven different environments. A total of 454 participants with a mean age of 41.5 years (range, 22-64 years) were revised. The screening campaign consisted of several rapid tests performed in a single session in the usual work environment of each participant, including measurement of WD, arm length, and MPD (VisionApp, VisionApp Solutions S.L.).
RESULTS: WD was significantly longer than MPD (82.5 ± 150.6 vs. 31.9 ± 6.3 cm, p < .001), whereas no significant differences were found between arm length (74.3 ± 4.8 cm) and WD (p = .493). WD was below 80 cm in 89.6% (407/454) of participants, whereas MPD was below 40 cm in 89.0% (404/454). No significant correlation was found between WD and MPD (r = 0.126, p = .117). Statistically significant differences were detected among job profile subgroups in WD (p < .001), with military personnel showing significantly longer WD than other professionals (p ≤ 0.018). Significant differences were also found between job profile subgroups in MPD (p = .006), with shorter MPDs for shoe factory professionals compared to sellers (p = .046).
CONCLUSIONS: WD and MPD vary significantly among individuals, but always showing a shorter MPD. WD varies significantly also according to the job profile, being necessary to consider this information when selecting the most optimal optical aid in each case, especially for the compensation of presbyopia.
METHODS: Cross-sectional study consisting of a screening campaign evaluating the visual status of professionals from seven different environments. A total of 454 participants with a mean age of 41.5 years (range, 22-64 years) were revised. The screening campaign consisted of several rapid tests performed in a single session in the usual work environment of each participant, including measurement of WD, arm length, and MPD (VisionApp, VisionApp Solutions S.L.).
RESULTS: WD was significantly longer than MPD (82.5 ± 150.6 vs. 31.9 ± 6.3 cm, p < .001), whereas no significant differences were found between arm length (74.3 ± 4.8 cm) and WD (p = .493). WD was below 80 cm in 89.6% (407/454) of participants, whereas MPD was below 40 cm in 89.0% (404/454). No significant correlation was found between WD and MPD (r = 0.126, p = .117). Statistically significant differences were detected among job profile subgroups in WD (p < .001), with military personnel showing significantly longer WD than other professionals (p ≤ 0.018). Significant differences were also found between job profile subgroups in MPD (p = .006), with shorter MPDs for shoe factory professionals compared to sellers (p = .046).
CONCLUSIONS: WD and MPD vary significantly among individuals, but always showing a shorter MPD. WD varies significantly also according to the job profile, being necessary to consider this information when selecting the most optimal optical aid in each case, especially for the compensation of presbyopia.