Documenta Ophthalmologica

, Volume 91, Issue 1, pp 57–85 | Cite as

Nearwork-induced transient myopia

A critical review
  • Editha Ong
  • Kenneth J. Ciuffreda


The literature on nearwork-induced transient myopia (NITM) is reviewed, with NITM being defined as the short-term myopic far point shift immediately following a sustained near visual task. A majority of these investigations demonstrated the presence of NITM for a variety of test parameters, e.g., visual acuity, contrast sensitivity and far point. Overall, these studies reported relatively small myopic shifts, with a mean of approximately 0.40 D and a range from 0.12 to 1.30 D. The subsequent decay is characterized by an exponential function with a relatively short time course. While the precise etiology and implications of NITM remain unclear, speculations regarding its origin and relevance to clinical myopia are discussed. Studies that did not demonstrate NITM are also reviewed.

Key words

Accommodation Retinal defocus Transient myopia Vergence 



nearwork-induced transient myopia


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Campbell FW, Westheimer G. Dynamics of accommodation responses of the human eye. J Physiol 1960; 151: 285–95.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ciuffreda KJ. Accommodation and its anomalies. In: Vision and Visual Dysfunction, vol. 1, Charman WN, ed. London: Mac Millan, 1991: 227–75.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lancaster WB, Williams ER. New light on the theory of accommodation, with practical applications. Trans Amer Acad Ophth Oto-Laryng 1914; 19: 170–95.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ostberg O. Accommodation and visual fatigue in display work. In: Grandjean. E. Vigliani E, eds. Ergonomic Aspects of Visual Display Terminals. London: Taylor & Francis, 1980, 41–52.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Haider M, Kundi M, Weibenbock M. Worker strain related to VDUs with differently coloured characters. In: Grandjean E, Vigliani E, eds. Ergonomic Aspects of Visual Display Terminals. London: Taylor & Francis, 1980: 53–64.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jaschinski-Kruza W. Transient myopia after visual work. Ergonomics 1984; 27: 1181–9.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ehrlich DL. Near vision stress: Vergence adaptation and accommodative fatigue. Ophthal Physiol Opt 1987; 7: 353–7.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fisher SK, Ciuffreda KJ, Levine S. Tonic accommodation, accommodative hysteresis, and refractive error. Am J Optom Physiol Opt 1987; 64: 799–809.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Owens DA, Wolf-Kelly K. Near work, visual fatigue and variations of oculomotor tonus. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1987; 28: 743–9.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gobba FM, Broglia A, Sarti R, Luberto F, Cavalleri A. Visual fatigue in VDT operators: objective measures and relation to environmental conditions. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 1988; 60: 81–7.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Tan RKT, O'Leary DJ. Accommodation characteristics before and after near work. Clin Exp Optom 1988; 71: 165–9.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rosenfield M, Ciuffreda KJ, Novogrodsky L. Contribution of accommodation and disparity-vergence to transient nearwork-induced myopic shifts. Ophthal Physiol Opt 1992a; 12: 433–6.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rosenfield M, Ciuffreda KJ, Novogrodsky L, Yu A, Gillard M. Sustained near vision does indeed induce myopia! (abstract). Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci (Suppl), 1992b; 33: 710.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Blustein GH, Rosenfleld M, Ciuffreda KJ. Does dark accommodation really change following sustained near fixation? (abstract). Optom Vis Sci (Suppl) 1993; 70: 16.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Miwa T, Tokoro T. Accommodative hysteresis of refractive errors in light and dark fields. Optom Vis Sci 1993; 70: 323–7.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rosenfield M, Ciuffreda KJ. Cognitive demand and transient nearwork-induced myopia. Optom Vis Sci 1994; 71: 381–5.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ong E, Ciuffreda KJ, Rosenfield M. Accommodation, vergence and nearwork-induced transient myopia (abstract). Optom Vis Sci 1994; 71: 129.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ciuffreda KJ, Ordonez X, Abnormal transient myopia in symptomatic individuals after sustained nearwork. Optom Vis Sci 1995; 72: 506–10.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ong E, Ciuffreda KJ, Rosenfield M. Effect of target proximity on transient myopia induced by equidioptric stimuli, Optom Vis Sci 1995; 72: 502–5.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ball GV. Symptoms in eye examination. London: Butterworth Scientific, 1982: 52.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hung GK, Ciuffreda KJ, Semmlow JL. Static vergence and accommodation: population norms and orthoptics effects. Doc Ophthal 1986; 62: 165–79.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Gilmartin B, Bullimore MA. Sustained near-vision augments inhibitory sympathetic innervation of the ciliary muscle. Clin Vis Sci 1987; 1: 197–208.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Murch GM. Visual fatigue and operator performance with DVST and raster displays. Proc of the SID 1983; 24: 53–61.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kran B, Ciuffreda KJ. Non-congruent stimuli and tonic accommodation. Am J Optom Physiol Opt 1988; 65: 703–9.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rosenfield M, Gilmartin B. Effect of target proximity on the open-loop accommodative response. Optom Vis Sci 1990; 67: 74–9.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Rosenfield M, Ciuffreda KJ, Hung GK. The linearity of proximally-induced accommodation and vergence. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1991; 32: 2985–91.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hung GK, Ciuffreda KJ, Rosenfield M. Static model of proximal accommodation and vergence. Ophthal Physiol Opt, 1996; 16: 31–41.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Rosenfield M, Ciuffreda KJ, Hung GK, Gilmartin B. Tonic accommodative: a review II. Accommodative adaptation and clinical aspects. Ophthal Physiol Opt 1994b; 14: 1–13.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hung GK. Adaptation model of accommodation and vergence. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 1992; 12: 319–26.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Dainoff MJ, Happ A. Visual fatigue and occupational stress in VDT operators. Hum Factors 1981; 23: 421–38.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Shen CS, Chiu SB, Wang AH, Ko LS. Accommodation and visual fatigue in visual display terminal (VDT) work. Acta Ophthlamologica (Suppl) 1988; 185: 175–6.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Gur S, Ron S. Contrast sensitivity and the near point of accommodation after work with a visual display unit. Isr J Med Sci 1992; 28: 618–21.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Nyman KG, Bengt GK, Voss M. Work with video display terminals among office employees. Scand J Work Environ Health 1985; 11: 483–7.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Pigion RG, Miller RJ. Fatigue of accommodation: Changes in accommodation after visual work. Am J Optom Physiol Opt 1985; 62: 853–63.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Ebenholtz SM, Zander PAL. Accommodative hysteresis: Influence on closed-loop measures of far point and near point. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1987; 28: 1246–9.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Hung GK, Semmlow JL. Static behavior of accommodation and vergence: computer simulation of an interactive dual-feedback system. IEEE Trans Biomed. Engn (BME) 1980; 27: 439–47.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Leibowitz HW, Owens DA. New evidence for the intermediate position of relaxed accommodation. Doc Ophthalmologica 1978; 46: 133–47.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Krumholz DM, Fox RS, Ciuffreda KJ. Short-term changes in tonic accommodation. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1986; 27: 552–7.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Takahashi M. Accommodative response in observing CRT display. J Sci Labour 1983; 59: 345–53.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Young T. On the Mechanism of the Eye. Philosophical Trans B 1801; 1: 23–88.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Coleman J, Wuchinich D, Carlin B. Accommodative changes in the axial dimension of the human eye. In: Gitter KA, Keeney AH, Sarin LK, Meyer D, eds. Ophthalmic Ultrasound. St. Louis: C.V. Mosby Co., 1969: 134–41.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Storey JK, Rabie EP. Ultrasound- a research tool in the study of accommodation. Ophthal Physiol Opt 1983; 3: 315–20.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Beauchamp R, Mitchell B. Ultrasound measures of vitreous chamber depth during ocular accommodation. Am J Optom Physiol Opt 1985; 62: 523–32.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Lepper RD, Trier HG. Measurement of accommodative changes in human eyes by means of a high-resolution ultrasonic system. In: Ossoinig KC, ed. Ophthalmic Echography, Proceedings of the 10th SIDUO Congress. Doc Ophthalmologica Proc Series 48. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff/Dr. W. Junk Publishers, 1987: 157–62.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Soriano HM. Echographic findings in accommodation. In: Ossoinig KC, ed. Ophthalmic Echography, Proceedings of the 10th SIDUO Congress. Doc Ophthalmologica Proc Series 48. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff/Dr. W. Junk Publishers, 1987: 163–9.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Shum PJT, Ko LS, Ng CL, Lin SL. A biometric study of ocular changes during accommodation. Am J Ophthalmol 1993; 115: 76–81.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Goldschmidt E. On the etiology of myopia- an epidemiological study. Acta Ophthalmologica (Suppl) 1968; 98: 1–172.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Sato T. The causes and prevention of acquired myopia. Yokohama: Helarudo Printing Co., Ltd., 1957.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Kikkawa Y, Sato T. Elastic properties of the lens. Exp Eye Res 1963; 2: 210–5.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Lograno MD, Reibaldi A. Receptor responses in fresh human ciliary muscle. Br J Ophthalmol 1986; 87: 379–85.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Suzuki R. Neuronal influence on the mechanical activity of the ciliary muscle. Br J Ophthalmol 1983; 78: 591–7.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Van Alphen GWHM. The adrenergic receptors of the intraocular muscles of the human eye. Invest Ophthalmol 1976; 15: 502–5.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Stenstrom S. Investigation of the variation and the covariation of the optical elements of human eyes, trans. Woolf D. Am J Optom Arch Am Acad Optom 1948; 25: 218–32, 286–99, 340–50, 388–97, 438–49, 496–504.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Van Alphen GWHM. On emmetropia and ametropia. Ophthalmologica (Suppl) 1961; 142: 1–92.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Curtin BJ. The Myopias- basic science and clinical management. Philadelphia: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1985.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    McBrien NA, Millodot M. A biometric investigation of late onset myopic eyes. Acta Ophthalmologica 1987; 65: 461–8.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Gilmartin B. A review of the role of sympathetic innervation of the ciliary muscle in ocular accommodation. Ophthal Physiol Opt 1986; 6: 23–37.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Biggs RD, Alpern M, Bennett DR. The effect of sympathomimetic drugs upon the amplitude of accommodation. Am J Ophthalmol 1959; 48: 169–72.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Tornqvist G. The relative importance of the parasympathetic and sympathetic nervous systems for accommodation in monkeys. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1967; 6: 612–7.Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Rosenfield M, Gilmartin B. Temporal aspects of accommodative adaptation. Optom Vis Sci 1989; 66: 229–34.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Wallman J, Gottlieb MD, Rajaram V Fugate-Wentzek LA. Local retinal regions control local eye growth and myopia. Science 1987; 237: 73–7.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Ni J, Smith EL III. Effects of chronic optical defocus on the kitten's refractive status. Vis Res 1989; 29: 929–38.Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Rabin J, Van Sluyters RC, Malach R. Emmetropization: a vision-dependent phenomenon. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1981; 20: 561–4.Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Goss DA, Wickham MG. Retinal-image mediated ocular growth as a mechanism for juvenile onset myopia and for emmetropization. Doc Ophthalmologica 1995; 90: 341–375.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Editha Ong
    • 1
  • Kenneth J. Ciuffreda
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Vision SciencesSUNY/State College of OptometryNew York CityUSA

Personalised recommendations