M.Tech. / As computers become more common in the work environment, more people are developing symptoms linked to long-term computer use. These include visual and eye-related symptoms as well as musculo-skeletal symptoms (Sheedy & Shaw-McMinn, 2003; Yan, Hu, Chen & Lu, 2007). This collection of symptoms is known as Computer Vision Syndrome (CVS). There are various allopathic modes of treatment available which are limited in terms of their long term use and side effects. Yan and colleagues (2007) indicate that a correctly designed, ergonomically efficient work place plays a significant role in limiting the development of CVS symptoms. Depending on the reasons for CVS and the symptoms associated with it, alternative treatment options may be appropriate (Yan, et al., 2007). Homoeopathy offers alternate treatment, however no extensive research has been done on the homoeopathic treatment of this condition. The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of the homoeopathic remedy Ruta graveolens 6cH together with ergonomic interventions in the work environment in the treatment of Computer Vision Syndrome. This was done by means of a selection questionnaire (APPENDIX B) and a symptom index form (APPENDIX C), rating the severity and frequency of symptoms. This research study is paired to a related study which investigated the efficacy of Ruta graveolens 6cH without ergonomic interventions. These two studies can later be compared to determine whether the remedy Ruta graveolens 6cH by itself is sufficient in treating computer vision syndrome. This study was approved by the Higher Degrees Committee (HDC48/2009) and the Academic Ethics Committee (AEC50/09) at the University of Johannesburg on the 19 June 2009. Thirty one people joined the study. They were recruited by means of flyers and advertisements (APPENDIX E) placed at the University of Johannesburg as well as corporate companies. Participation was voluntary and by means of informed consent (APPENDIX A). Participants were required to fill in a selection questionnaire (APPENDIX B) to see if they qualified for the study. It was a double-blind placebo controlled study in which participants were placed into one of 2 groups. Both groups were required to change the layout of their work environment in order to ensure ergonomic efficiency at their work station (APPENDIX D). Of the two groups, one was dispensed vi the medicated prescription and the other an identically presented unmedicated prescription. Participants were requested to take the medication twice a day for 4 weeks. They were also required to complete a symptom index form (APPENDIX C) on a weekly basis. These forms were collected by the researcher at the end of the four weeks. There was no risk associated with taking the medication. Participants’ right to privacy was adhered to and they were free to withdraw from the study at any time. Of the 31 people who joined the study, 29 completed the study.