Video Display Terminals and Neck Pain: When Ophthalmology Explains the Failure of Biomechanical Intervention

  • Elvio FerreiraJr.
  • Karina dos Santos Rocha Ferreira
  • Graziela dos Santos Rocha Ferreira
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4566)


This case report presents a video display terminal (VDT) user complaining of neck pain. It was suggested that her complains would be due to the low position of her computer display. However, raising the monitor actually worsened the discomfort. Being presbyopic and wearing varifocal lenses, she actually was undercorrected — wearing new lenses (with higher reading addition) improved her symptoms. The role of refraction errors as a cause of neck pain and the importance of eye examinations for VDT users are discussed.


neck pain video display terminals refractive errors ergonomics 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Lim, S.–Y., Sauter, S.L., Schnorr, T.M.: Occupational Health Aspects of Work with Video Display Terminals. In: Rom, W.N. (ed.) Environmental and Occupational Medicine, 3rd edn., pp. 1333–1344. Lippincott–Raven Publishers, Philadelphia (1998)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ming, Z., Närhi, M., Siivola, J.: Neck and shoulder pain related to computer use. Pathophysiology 11, 51–56 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Horgen, G., Aarås, A., Thoresen, M.: Will Visual Discomfort among Visual Display Unit (VDU) Users Change in Development When Moving from Single Vision Lenses to Specially Designed VDU Progressive Lenses? Optometry and Vision Science 81, 341–349 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Punnett, L., Wegman, D.H.: Work related musculoskeletal disorders: the epidemiologic evidence and the debate. Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology 14, 13–23 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Aarås, A., Horgen, G., Bjørset, H.–H., Ro, O., Thoresen, M.: Musculoskeletal, visual and psicosocial stress in VDU operators before and after multidisciplinary ergonomic interventions. Applied Ergonomics 29, 335–354 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Melis, M.: Headache Associated With Refractive Errors: Overestimated or Overlooked? Headache 43, 297–298 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Horgen, G., Aarås, A., Fagerthun, H., Larsen, S.: Is there a reduction in postural load when wearing progressive lenses during VDT work over a three-month period? Applied Ergonomics 26, 165–171 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Horgen, G., Aarås, A., Fagerthun, H., Larsen, S.: The work posture and postural load of the neck/shoulder muscles when correcting presbyopia with different types of multifocal lenses on VDU-workers. In: Smith, M.J., Salvendy, G. (eds.) Work With Computers: Organizational, Management, Stress and Health Aspects, pp. 338–347. Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam (1989)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Harms-Ringdahl, K.: An assessment of shoulder exercise and load elicited pain in cervical spine. Scandinavian Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine Supplement, vol. 14 (1986)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Babski-Reeves, K., Stanfield, J., Hughes, L.: Assessment of video display workstation set up on risk factors associated with the development of low back and neck discomfort. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 35, 593–604 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sommerich, C., Joines, S., Psihogios, J.: Effects of VDT viewing angle on user biomechanics, comfort, and preference. In: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 42nd Annual Meeting. Chicago, pp. 861–865 (1998)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kalsi, M., Heron, G., Charman, N.: Changes in the static accommodation response with age. Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics 21, 77–84 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sant’Anna, N.A., Uras, R.: Lentes de Correção de Presbiopia. In: Bicas, H.E.A., Alves, A.A., Uras, R. (eds.) Refratometria Ocular. Cultura Médica, Rio de Janeiro, pp. 259–267 ( 2005)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sheedy, J.E., Hardy, R.F.: The optics of occupational progressive lenses. Optometry 76, 432–441 (2005)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Piccoli, B., Braga, M., Zambelli, P.L., Bergamasch, A.: Viewing distance variation and related ophthalmological changes in office activities with and without VDUs. Ergonomics 39, 719–728 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Thomson, W.D.: Eye problems and visual display terminals — the facts and the fallacies. Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics 18, 111–119 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    World Health Organization.: Update on Visual Display Terminals and Workers’ Health. World Health Organization, Geneva (1990)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elvio FerreiraJr.
    • 1
    • 2
  • Karina dos Santos Rocha Ferreira
    • 2
  • Graziela dos Santos Rocha Ferreira
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Occupational Safety & Health Service, São Camilo College, Av. Nazaré 1501, São Paulo, SP 04263-200Brazil
  2. 2.The Geraldo Ferreira Institute of Medicine, R. Vergueiro 3185 cj.44, São Paulo, SP 04101-300Brazil
  3. 3.Medical College, University of São Paulo, Av. Dr. Arnaldo 455, São Paulo, SP 01246-903Brazil

Personalised recommendations