PDF(Sci-hub)
Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: Blinking plays an important role in protecting the eyes, and the use of computers has been associated with a reduction in the blink rate. The goal of this study was to evaluate the effect of a virtual reality headset on blinking and lipid layer thickness and to compare these data to those associated with a conventional desktop monitor.
METHODS: Two experiments were performed to compare the effect of 20minutes of use of a virtual reality headset (FOVE) and 20minutes of use of a desktop monitor on the frequency and length of blinks (experiment 1, 15 participants) and on the thickness of the lipid layer as measured by Lipiview (experiment 2, 12 participants).
RESULTS: In the first experiment, the blink rate [F(1.83)=4.3, P=0.04, β=0.36] and duration [F(1.83)=13, P=0.001, β=0.35] increased with time under both conditions, but no statistical difference was found between the two conditions (headset vs. desktop monitor) either for blink rate [rmANOVA F(1.11)=0.01, P=0.92; headset: 15.1 blinks, 95% CI: 12.6 to 17.6 blinks; desktop: 14.6 blinks, 95% CI: 13.6 to 15.7 blinks] or for blink duration [rmANOVA F(1.11)=4.534, P=0.06; headset: 205.75ms, 95% CI: 200.9 to 210.6ms; desktop: 202.82ms, 95% CI: 198.2 to 207.5ms]. However, strong individual variations were observed. Evaluation of simulator sickness and visual fatigue by questionnaire showed no significant differences between the two conditions (SSQ simulator sickness questionnaire: V=46, P=0.62; VFQ visual fatigue questionnaire: V=15.5, P=0.13). In the second experiment, the lipid layer thickness increased significantly after use of the VR headset [F(1.18)=11.03, P=0.004, headset: 76.2nm, desktop: 58.8nm].
CONCLUSIONS: In terms of recommendations, the effect of virtual reality headsets on blink duration and frequency during a moderate exposure (20minutes) is comparable to that of a conventional desktop monitor. However, the strong individual variations observed, the lack of reliable tests to evaluate this individual sensitivity, and the significant increase in lipid layer thickness in experiment 2 suggest the value of a more detailed investigation, in particular with consideration of a longer exposure time and other tear film parameters.
METHODS: Two experiments were performed to compare the effect of 20minutes of use of a virtual reality headset (FOVE) and 20minutes of use of a desktop monitor on the frequency and length of blinks (experiment 1, 15 participants) and on the thickness of the lipid layer as measured by Lipiview (experiment 2, 12 participants).
RESULTS: In the first experiment, the blink rate [F(1.83)=4.3, P=0.04, β=0.36] and duration [F(1.83)=13, P=0.001, β=0.35] increased with time under both conditions, but no statistical difference was found between the two conditions (headset vs. desktop monitor) either for blink rate [rmANOVA F(1.11)=0.01, P=0.92; headset: 15.1 blinks, 95% CI: 12.6 to 17.6 blinks; desktop: 14.6 blinks, 95% CI: 13.6 to 15.7 blinks] or for blink duration [rmANOVA F(1.11)=4.534, P=0.06; headset: 205.75ms, 95% CI: 200.9 to 210.6ms; desktop: 202.82ms, 95% CI: 198.2 to 207.5ms]. However, strong individual variations were observed. Evaluation of simulator sickness and visual fatigue by questionnaire showed no significant differences between the two conditions (SSQ simulator sickness questionnaire: V=46, P=0.62; VFQ visual fatigue questionnaire: V=15.5, P=0.13). In the second experiment, the lipid layer thickness increased significantly after use of the VR headset [F(1.18)=11.03, P=0.004, headset: 76.2nm, desktop: 58.8nm].
CONCLUSIONS: In terms of recommendations, the effect of virtual reality headsets on blink duration and frequency during a moderate exposure (20minutes) is comparable to that of a conventional desktop monitor. However, the strong individual variations observed, the lack of reliable tests to evaluate this individual sensitivity, and the significant increase in lipid layer thickness in experiment 2 suggest the value of a more detailed investigation, in particular with consideration of a longer exposure time and other tear film parameters.
摘要：
目的：闪烁对保护眼睛有重要作用，电脑的使用与眨眼率的降低有关。这项研究的目的是评估虚拟现实耳机对闪烁和脂质层厚度的影响，并将这些数据与与传统桌面监视器相关的数据进行比较。
方法：进行了两个实验，以比较使用虚拟现实耳机（FOVE）20分钟和使用桌面监视器20分钟对眨眼频率和眨眼长度（实验1，15名参与者）以及通过Lipiview测量的脂质层厚度（实验2，12名参与者）的影响。
结果：在第一个实验中，闪烁率[F(1.83)=4.3,P=0.04,β=0.36]和持续时间[F(1.83)=13,P=0.001,β=0.35]随时间增加,但在两种情况(耳机与桌面显示器)闪烁速率[rmANOVAF(1.11)=0.01，P=0.92；耳机:15.1闪烁，95%CI：12.6至17.6闪烁；台式机：14.6闪烁，95％CI：13.6至15.7闪烁]或闪烁持续时间[rmANOVAF（1.11）=4.534，P=0.06；耳机：205.75ms，95%CI：200.9至210.6ms；台式机：202.82ms，95%CI：198.2至207.5ms]。然而,观察到强烈的个体差异。通过问卷对模拟器病和视疲劳的评估显示两种情况之间没有显着差异（SSQ模拟器病问卷：V=46，P=0.62；VFQ视疲劳问卷：V=15.5，P=0.13）。在第二个实验中,使用VR耳机后脂质层厚度显着增加[F（1.18）=11.03，P=0.004，耳机：76.2nm，台式机:58.8nm]。
结论：就建议而言，在适度曝光（20分钟）期间，虚拟现实耳机对眨眼持续时间和频率的影响与传统桌面监视器相当。然而,观察到的强烈的个体差异，缺乏可靠的测试来评估这种个体的敏感性，实验2中脂质层厚度的显着增加表明了更详细研究的价值，特别是考虑到更长的暴露时间和其他泪膜参数。
方法：进行了两个实验，以比较使用虚拟现实耳机（FOVE）20分钟和使用桌面监视器20分钟对眨眼频率和眨眼长度（实验1，15名参与者）以及通过Lipiview测量的脂质层厚度（实验2，12名参与者）的影响。
结果：在第一个实验中，闪烁率[F(1.83)=4.3,P=0.04,β=0.36]和持续时间[F(1.83)=13,P=0.001,β=0.35]随时间增加,但在两种情况(耳机与桌面显示器)闪烁速率[rmANOVAF(1.11)=0.01，P=0.92；耳机:15.1闪烁，95%CI：12.6至17.6闪烁；台式机：14.6闪烁，95％CI：13.6至15.7闪烁]或闪烁持续时间[rmANOVAF（1.11）=4.534，P=0.06；耳机：205.75ms，95%CI：200.9至210.6ms；台式机：202.82ms，95%CI：198.2至207.5ms]。然而,观察到强烈的个体差异。通过问卷对模拟器病和视疲劳的评估显示两种情况之间没有显着差异（SSQ模拟器病问卷：V=46，P=0.62；VFQ视疲劳问卷：V=15.5，P=0.13）。在第二个实验中,使用VR耳机后脂质层厚度显着增加[F（1.18）=11.03，P=0.004，耳机：76.2nm，台式机:58.8nm]。
结论：就建议而言，在适度曝光（20分钟）期间，虚拟现实耳机对眨眼持续时间和频率的影响与传统桌面监视器相当。然而,观察到的强烈的个体差异，缺乏可靠的测试来评估这种个体的敏感性，实验2中脂质层厚度的显着增加表明了更详细研究的价值，特别是考虑到更长的暴露时间和其他泪膜参数。
