University Archives

Purpose

To characterize and compare the sagittal power profiles of 15 commercially available multifocal soft contact lenses—both monthly and daily designs—using a high-resolution NIMO device and the Visual Strehl on the Frequency Domain (VSOTF) with the goal of evaluating how add power implementation varies across brands and modalities.

Methods

The average (out of five measurements) sagittal power of each of the 15 lenses as a function of the radius was obtained with the NIMO(Lambda-X) instrument. The lens set included: Alcon (TOTAL30 and DAILIES Total1, each in High, Medium, and Low additions), Bausch & Lomb (Soflens, PureVision, and Infuse in High and Low additions), and Johnson & Johnson (Acuvue, in High, Medium, and Low additions). The corresponding Visual VSOTF through focus (257 steps between-2.00 and 6.00 diopters) of the lenses were calculated for pupil sizes ranging between 1 and 7 mm. After that, the theoretical evaluation of the 15 lenses was coupled with the low and high order aberrations of a data base of 65 eyes with pupils ranging between 2.45 mm and 6.27 mm. A total of 1080 combinations were simulated.

Results

Commercial multifocal soft contact lenses exhibit substantial variability in sagittal power distribution, add implementation strategies, and predicted optical performance across brands and replacement modalities. Monthly and daily designs from the same manufacturer often differed in the magnitude and radial extent of plus power, as well as in the smoothness or zonal nature of their profiles. These design differences produced distinct VSOTF through-focus behaviors that were highly dependent on pupil size.

When coupled with real-eye aberration data from a large sample, the lenses demonstrated considerable variation in predicted visual quality, underscoring the importance of matching lens design to individual ocular optics. Overall, the results highlight that multifocal lens performance cannot be inferred from labeled add alone; rather, true optical behavior is determined by the full power profile and its interaction with pupil size and ocular aberrations. This characterization provides a framework for guiding lens selection in both presbyopic and myopia-control applications.

Conclusions

Commercial multifocal lenses show wide variation in add distribution and VSOTF performance, strongly influenced by pupil size and ocular aberrations. These differences indicate that labeled add does not predict functional performance; instead, optimal lens selection depends on matching full optical profiles to individual ocular characteristics.