From the Department of Optometry and Vision Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
From the Department of Optometry and Vision Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia..
Am J Ophthalmol. 2021 Jun;226:243-251. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2021.02.010. Epub 2021 Feb 12.
To investigate if blue-blocking lenses are effective in reducing the ocular signs and symptoms of eye strain associated with computer use.
Double-masked, randomized controlled trial.
A total of 120 symptomatic computer users were randomly assigned (1:1) into a "positive" or "negative" advocacy arm (ie, a clinician either advocating or not advocating for the intervention via a prerecorded video). Participants were further sub-randomized (1:1) to receive either clear (placebo) or blue-blocking spectacles. All participants were led to believe they had received an active intervention. Participants performed a 2-hour computer task while wearing their assigned spectacle intervention. The prespecified primary outcome measures were the mean change (post- minus pre-computer task) in eye strain symptom score and critical flicker-fusion frequency (CFF, an objective measure of eye strain). The study also investigated whether clinician advocacy of the intervention (in a positive or negative light) modulated clinical outcomes.
All participants completed the study. In the primary analysis, for CFF, no significant effect was found for advocacy type (positive or negative, p = .164) and spectacle intervention type (blue-blocking or clear lens, p = .304). Likewise, for eye strain symptom score, no differences were found for advocacy (p = .410) or spectacle lens types (p = .394). No adverse events were documented.
Blue-blocking lenses did not alter signs or symptoms of eye strain with computer use relative to standard clear lenses. Clinician advocacy type had no bearing on clinical outcomes.
研究防蓝光镜片是否能有效减轻与计算机使用相关的眼疲劳的眼部症状和体征。
双盲、随机对照试验。
共 120 名有症状的计算机使用者被随机分配(1:1)进入“阳性”或“阴性”倡导手臂(即临床医生通过预先录制的视频来倡导或不倡导干预措施)。参与者进一步按 1:1 比例随机分配接受普通(安慰剂)或防蓝光眼镜。所有参与者都被引导相信他们接受了积极的干预。参与者在佩戴指定的眼镜干预措施的情况下进行了 2 小时的计算机任务。预设的主要结局指标是眼疲劳症状评分和临界闪烁融合频率(CFF,眼疲劳的客观测量)的平均变化(计算机任务后的减去之前)。该研究还调查了临床医生对干预措施的倡导(积极或消极)是否调节了临床结果。
所有参与者都完成了研究。在主要分析中,对于 CFF,倡导类型(阳性或阴性,p=0.164)和眼镜干预类型(防蓝光或普通镜片,p=0.304)均无显著效果。同样,对于眼疲劳症状评分,倡导(p=0.410)或眼镜镜片类型(p=0.394)均无差异。未记录到不良事件。
与标准普通镜片相比,防蓝光镜片并未改变与计算机使用相关的眼疲劳的迹象或症状。临床医生的倡导类型对临床结果没有影响。