Prevalence of dry eye disease in visual display terminal workers: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Courtin, Romain, Pereira, Bruno, Naughton, Geraldine Ann, Chamoux, Alain, Chiambaretta, Frédéric, Lanhers, Charlotte and Dutheil, Frederic. (2016) Prevalence of dry eye disease in visual display terminal workers: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open. 6(1), pp. 1 - 8. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-009675
|Authors||Courtin, Romain, Pereira, Bruno, Naughton, Geraldine Ann, Chamoux, Alain, Chiambaretta, Frédéric, Lanhers, Charlotte and Dutheil, Frederic|
Objective: To evaluate the prevalence and risk factors of dry eye disease (DED) in workers using visual display terminals (VDT). Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Data sources: We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase and Science Direct databases for studies reporting DED prevalence in VDT workers. Results: 16 of the 9049 identified studies were included, with a total of 11 365 VDT workers. Despite a global DED prevalence of 49.5% (95% CI 47.5 to 50.6), ranging from 9.5% to 87.5%, important heterogeneity (I2=98.8%, p < 0.0001) was observed. Variable diagnosis criteria used within studies were: questionnaires on symptoms, tear film anomalies and corneoconjunctival epithelial damage. Some studies combined criteria to define DED. Heterogeneous prevalence was associated with stratifications on symptoms (I2=98.7%, p < 0.0001), tears (I2=98.5%, p < 0.0001) and epithelial damage (I2=96.0%, p < 0.0001). Stratification of studies with two criteria adjusted the prevalence to 54.0% (95% CI 52.1 to 55.9), whereas studies using three criteria resulted in a prevalence of 11.6% (95% CI 10.5 to 12.9). According to the literature, prevalence of DED was more frequent in females than in males and increased with age. Conclusions: Owing to the disparity of the diagnosis criteria studied to define DED, the global prevalence of 49.5% lacked reliability because of the important heterogeneity. We highlight the necessity of implementing common DED diagnostic criteria to allow a more reliable estimation in order to develop the appropriate preventive occupational actions.
|Journal citation||6 (1), pp. 1 - 8|
|Publisher||BMJ Publishing Group|
|Digital Object Identifier (DOI)||https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-009675|
|Open access||Open access|
|Page range||1 - 8|
|Research Group||Sports Performance, Recovery, Injury and New Technologies (SPRINT) Research Centre|
This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work noncommercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial.
|Place of publication||United Kingdom|
1views this month
0downloads this month