Background and Aim: Digital devices such as mobile phones, laptops, tablets, and other visual display terminals are being extensively used at workplaces these days. Indiscriminate use can lead to various health concerns, including computer vision syndrome (CVS). By identifying which subgroup of employees is more susceptible to these symptoms, we can effectively prevent or reduce their occurrence by educating them. The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of CVS among staff of medical college and to understand which types of gadgets were associated with it, risk factors and nature of work that predisposes to this condition. Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted among 98 staff members at a medical college in South India. Participants completed a validated questionnaire assessing demographic details, digital device use, symptom frequency, and relief strategies. CVS was defined as a CVS score ≥6. Data were analyzed using Mann–Whitney U -test, Chi-square test, and Binary logistic regression. Results: The prevalence of CVS was 47.96% with receptionists having the highest proportion (72.7%) of all the occupations. Females were found to have higher mean CVS scores (7.22) in comparison to males (4.30), but this difference was not found to be statistically significant (P = 0.367). Binary logistic regression indicated that excessive blinking was the most powerful predictor (Odds ratio [OR] =64.9), alongside the itching and burning sensation of the eyes (OR = 10). 36.7% of the participants were not aware of CVS and its symptoms. Conclusion: CVS is a common symptom complex occurring in digital device users, which is increasing in prevalence owing to advances in workplace technology. There is a need to increase its awareness among staff to help them overcome its related problems by targeting individuals with a higher risk of developing CVS.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Achar et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: