New insights in the reproducibility of visual and electronic tooth color assessment for dental practice.
Journal
Head & face medicine
ISSN: 1746-160X
Titre abrégé: Head Face Med
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101245792
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
16 Dec 2020
16 Dec 2020
Historique:
received:
08
07
2020
accepted:
18
11
2020
entrez:
16
12
2020
pubmed:
17
12
2020
medline:
18
12
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The aim of the study was to compare a 2D and 3D color system concerning a variety of statistical and graphical methods to assess validity and reliability of color measurements, and provide guidance on when to use which system and how to interpret color distance measures, including ΔE and d(0M1). The color of teeth 14 to 24 of 35 patients undergoing regular bleaching treatment was visually assessed and electronically measured with the spectrophotometer Shade Inspector™. Tooth color was recorded before bleaching treatment, after 14 days, and again after 6 months. VITAPAN® Classical (2D) and VITA-3D-Master® (3D) served as reference systems. Concerning repeated measurements, the 2D system was superior to the 3D system, both visually and electronically in terms of ΔE and d(OM1), for statistics of agreement and reliability. All four methods showed strong patterns in Bland-Altman plots. In the 3D system, hue was less reliable than lightness and chroma, which was more pronounced visually than electronically. The smallest detectable color difference varied among the four methods used, and was most favorable in the electronic 2D system. Comparing the methods, the agreement between the 2D and 3D system in terms of ΔE was not good. The reliability of the visual and electronic method was essentially the same in the 2D and 3D systems; this comparability is fair to good. The 3D system may confuse human raters and even electronic devices. The 2D system is the simple and best choice.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The aim of the study was to compare a 2D and 3D color system concerning a variety of statistical and graphical methods to assess validity and reliability of color measurements, and provide guidance on when to use which system and how to interpret color distance measures, including ΔE and d(0M1).
METHODS
METHODS
The color of teeth 14 to 24 of 35 patients undergoing regular bleaching treatment was visually assessed and electronically measured with the spectrophotometer Shade Inspector™. Tooth color was recorded before bleaching treatment, after 14 days, and again after 6 months. VITAPAN® Classical (2D) and VITA-3D-Master® (3D) served as reference systems.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Concerning repeated measurements, the 2D system was superior to the 3D system, both visually and electronically in terms of ΔE and d(OM1), for statistics of agreement and reliability. All four methods showed strong patterns in Bland-Altman plots. In the 3D system, hue was less reliable than lightness and chroma, which was more pronounced visually than electronically. The smallest detectable color difference varied among the four methods used, and was most favorable in the electronic 2D system. Comparing the methods, the agreement between the 2D and 3D system in terms of ΔE was not good. The reliability of the visual and electronic method was essentially the same in the 2D and 3D systems; this comparability is fair to good.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE
CONCLUSIONS
The 3D system may confuse human raters and even electronic devices. The 2D system is the simple and best choice.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33323128
doi: 10.1186/s13005-020-00248-w
pii: 10.1186/s13005-020-00248-w
pmc: PMC7739456
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
37Références
J Dent. 2010;38 Suppl 2:e2-16
pubmed: 20621154
BMJ. 2005 Oct 15;331(7521):903
pubmed: 16223828
J Dent. 2009;37 Suppl 1:e15-20
pubmed: 19329240
J Clin Epidemiol. 2006 Oct;59(10):1033-9
pubmed: 16980142
Int J Prosthodont. 2002 Jan-Feb;15(1):73-8
pubmed: 11887603
Int J Prosthodont. 2005 Sep-Oct;18(5):422-6
pubmed: 16220809
J Prosthet Dent. 1990 Feb;63(2):155-62
pubmed: 2304021
Pract Proced Aesthet Dent. 2002 Jan-Feb;14(1):59-67; quiz 68
pubmed: 11905160
J Oral Rehabil. 2009 Jan;36(1):65-70
pubmed: 18976272
J Prosthet Dent. 2019 Feb;121(2):271-275
pubmed: 30722987
Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2004 Jun;24(3):222-31
pubmed: 15227770
J Esthet Restor Dent. 2015 Mar-Apr;27 Suppl 1:S1-9
pubmed: 25886208
Lancet. 1986 Feb 8;1(8476):307-10
pubmed: 2868172
Stat Med. 2010 Feb 10;29(3):401-10
pubmed: 19998394
Vojnosanit Pregl. 2013 Oct;70(10):929-34
pubmed: 24313174
Lancet. 1995 Oct 21;346(8982):1085-7
pubmed: 7564793
Clin Oral Investig. 2013 May;17(4):1161-6
pubmed: 22828935
J Prosthet Dent. 2016 Apr;115(4):482-8
pubmed: 26548876
J Prosthet Dent. 2007 Sep;98(3):175-85
pubmed: 17854618
Int J Comput Dent. 2017;20(4):343-361
pubmed: 29292410
Eur J Epidemiol. 2016 Apr;31(4):337-50
pubmed: 27209009
Am J Epidemiol. 2017 Sep 15;186(6):639-645
pubmed: 28938712
Dent Mater J. 2016;35(1):63-9
pubmed: 26830824
Epidemiology. 1996 Sep;7(5):561
pubmed: 8862998
Oper Dent. 2009 May-Jun;34(3):337-43
pubmed: 19544824
J Prosthet Dent. 2008 Jul;100(1):18-28
pubmed: 18589070
J Dent Res. 2002 Aug;81(8):578-82
pubmed: 12147751
Psychol Bull. 1979 Mar;86(2):420-8
pubmed: 18839484
J Esthet Restor Dent. 2001;13(4):254-63
pubmed: 11572509
J Prosthet Dent. 2006 Dec;96(6):402-11
pubmed: 17174657
Acta Stomatol Croat. 2016 Mar;50(1):34-9
pubmed: 27688424
Int J Esthet Dent. 2017;12(3):396-404
pubmed: 28717795
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2001 Fall;17(4):479-87
pubmed: 11758292
J Oral Rehabil. 2007 Nov;34(11):848-54
pubmed: 17919252
Gen Dent. 2014 Nov-Dec;62(6):47-9
pubmed: 25369386
Quintessence Int. 2009 Nov-Dec;40(10):833-6
pubmed: 19898714
Quintessence Int. 2009 May;40(5):421-6
pubmed: 19582247
J Dent Res. 1989 May;68(5):819-22
pubmed: 2715476
Stat Methods Med Res. 2019 Aug;28(8):2557-2565
pubmed: 29488448
Int J Prosthodont. 2014 Jul-Aug;27(4):376-82
pubmed: 25010883
J Prosthet Dent. 2012 Jul;108(1):9-14
pubmed: 22765984
Biomed Tech (Berl). 2008 Oct;53(5):259-63
pubmed: 18840068
Stat Med. 2008 Feb 28;27(5):778-80
pubmed: 17907247
Am J Dent. 2007 Jun;20(3):142-6
pubmed: 17672253
Quintessence Int. 2009 Oct;40(9):e69-79
pubmed: 19862392
J Prosthodont. 2007 Jul-Aug;16(4):269-76
pubmed: 17451478
Oper Dent. 1999 Nov-Dec;24(6):358-63
pubmed: 10823085
J Prosthet Dent. 2002 Jun;87(6):657-66
pubmed: 12131889
Head Face Med. 2018 Oct 22;14(1):22
pubmed: 30348191
J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2016 Oct-Dec;16(4):352-358
pubmed: 27746599
J Dent. 2014 Jun;42(6):742-5
pubmed: 24140995
J Conserv Dent. 2010 Oct;13(4):249-55
pubmed: 21217954
Oper Dent. 2001 Sep-Oct;26(5):435-9
pubmed: 11551006
J Oral Rehabil. 2009 Nov;36(11):848-55
pubmed: 19793231