Relationship Between Electronic Device Usage with Asthenopia in Workers at Pelita Harapan University Lippo Karawaci

Authors

  • Sachio Harlendo Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Pelita Harapan,
  • Josiah Irma Ophthalmology Department, Universitas Pelita Harapan
  • Saraswati Anindita Rizki Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Pelita Harapan,
  • Ruth Syeela Widianty Siloam Hospitals Lippo Village, Tangerang

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.19166/med.v15i2.10828

Keywords:

Asthenopia, Electronic Device Usage, Workers

Abstract

Background:

Breast cancer is the most common malignancy among women and a leading cause of cancer-related mortality. Early detection is crucial to improve survival outcomes. Mammography is considered the gold standard for screening women over 40 years, while ultrasonography (USG) is frequently used in younger women with dense breasts. However, diagnostic accuracy varies, and comparative studies in Indonesia remain limited. To compare the diagnostic accuracy of mammography and ultrasonography in differentiating benign and malignant breast lesions using histopathology as the Gold standard.

 

Methods:

This cross-sectional analytic study included 91 patients who underwent mammography, ultrasonography, and histopathological confirmation at MRCCC Siloam Semanggi Hospital. Diagnostic parameters including sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), accuracy, and area under the curve (AUC) were calculated. Statistical analysis used McNemar’s test and ROC curve analysis based on Hanley & McNeil’s method, with p < 0.05 considered significant.

 

Result:

Ultrasonography demonstrated higher sensitivity (98.4%) and NPV (92.3%) than mammography (96.7% and 88.9%), indicating better ability to rule out malignancy. Mammography showed higher specificity (53.3% vs. 40.0%) and PPV (80.8% vs. 76.9%), reflecting better performance in identifying benign lesions. Overall accuracy was slightly higher for mammography (82.4%) compared to USG (79.1%). The AUC for mammography was 0.750 (95% CI: 0.630–0.870), while USG had an AUC of 0.692 (95% CI: 0.565–0.819). Overlapping confidence intervals indicated no statistically significant difference in diagnostic accuracy between the two modalities (p > 0.05).

 

Conclusions:

Mammography and ultrasonography both demonstrated high diagnostic performance with complementary strengths. Mammography provided higher specificity and PPV, while USG offered superior sensitivity and NPV. Given the small difference in accuracy and overlapping AUC confidence intervals, no significant difference was found between the two modalities. Combined use of mammography and USG may improve diagnostic accuracy in clinical practice.

References

1.Kaur K, Gurnani B, Nayak S, Deori N, Kaur S, Jethani J, et al. Digital eye strain - A comprehensive review. Ophthalmol Ther. 2022;11:1655–80.

2.Rustam R. Hubungan durasi dan posisi penggunaan smartphone terhadap astenopia pada mahasiswa Fakultas Kedokteran Universitas Baiturrahmah angkatan. Syntax Literate. 2022;12(7). Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.36418/syntax- literate.v7i12.10389

3.Mentari D, Mita M, Righo A. Hubungan durasi penggunaan gawai dengan kejadian astenopia pada mahasiswa program studi keperawatan saat pandemi COVID-19. J Sains Kesehat. 2023;5(4):507–13.

4.Badan Pusat Statistik. Statistik Telekomunikasi Indonesia 2022 [Internet]. Jakarta (ID): BPS; 2023 [cited 2025 Apr 24]. Available from: https://www.bps.go.id/id/publication/20 23/08/31/131385d0253c6aae7c7a59fa/st atistik-telekomunikasi-indonesia- 2022.html

5.Badan Pusat Statistik. Statistik Telekomunikasi Indonesia 2022. Jakarta (ID): BPS; 2023.

6.Touma Sawaya R, El Meski N, Saba J, Lahoud C, Saab L, Haouili M, et al. Asthenopia among university students: The eye of the digital generation. J Family Med Prim Care. 2020;9(8):3921.

7.Shrestha GS. Vision-related problems in visually demanding occupations: A mini review. JOJ Ophthalmol. 2017;2(4).

8.Pakdee S, Sengsoon P. Immediate Effects of Different Screen Sizes on Visual Fatigue in Video Display Terminal Users. Iranian Rehabilitation Journal. 2021;19(2):137-146.

9.Iqbal M, Said O, Ibrahim O, Soliman A. Visual sequelae of computer vision syndrome: A cross-sectional case-control study. J Ophthalmol. 2021;2021:6630286

10.Mohamud MA. Frequency of presenting clinical features of asthenopia (ocular fatigue) in refractive patients. Ophthalmol Pak. 2017;7(3).

Downloads

Published

2026-03-10

How to Cite

Harlendo, S., Josiah Irma, Saraswati Anindita Rizki, & Ruth Syeela Widianty. (2026). Relationship Between Electronic Device Usage with Asthenopia in Workers at Pelita Harapan University Lippo Karawaci. Medicinus, 15(2), 48–53. https://doi.org/10.19166/med.v15i2.10828

Issue

Vol. 15 No. 2 (2026): February

Section

Clinical Research

License

Copyright (c) 2026 Sachio Harlendo, Josiah Irma, Saraswati Anindita Rizki, Ruth Syeela Widianty

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

1) Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY-SA 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

2) Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

3) Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website). The final published PDF should be used and bibliographic details that credit the publication in this journal should be included.