Visual and instrumental coverage error of two dental shade guides: an in vivo study.
Color differences
Coverage error
Shade guides
Shade matching
Journal
Clinical oral investigations
ISSN: 1436-3771
Titre abrégé: Clin Oral Investig
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9707115
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Sep 2022
Sep 2022
Historique:
received:
01
03
2022
accepted:
17
05
2022
pubmed:
1
6
2022
medline:
17
9
2022
entrez:
31
5
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
This study aims to evaluate in vivo the color agreement between natural teeth and dental shade guides by means of visual and instrumental coverage error ([Formula: see text]) index. The color of the middle third of 735 incisors was visually determined by two evaluators using the Vita Classical (VC) and Vita 3D Master (V3DM) shade guides. The color match between the natural tooth and the shade tab was rated as poor (P), good (G), or optimum (O) by each observer. CIE color coordinates of the target teeth and shade tabs of VC and V3DM were instrumentally measured using a clinical spectrophotometer. Visual ([Formula: see text]) and instrumental ([Formula: see text]) coverage error indexes were computed using CIELAB and CIEDE2000 metrics for both shade guides. For [Formula: see text] calculation, only the concordant inter-observer determination on tooth shade rated as O-O or O-G was used. The results were evaluated using perceptibility (PT, [Formula: see text]= 1.2, [Formula: see text]= 0.8) and acceptability (AT, [Formula: see text]= 2.7, [Formula: see text]= 1.8) color thresholds for dentistry. VC and V3DM exhibited [Formula: see text] (2.5, 3.2, and 3.2, 2.7 CIELAB units; 1.9, 2.3, and 2.8, 2.4 CIEDE2000 units, respectively, for O-O and O-G match) and [Formula: see text] (4.7, 4.8, and 4.1, 4.6 CIELAB units; 3.3, 3.4, and 3.4, 3.6 CIEDE2000 units, respectively, for O-O and O-G match) values greater than 50:50% AT for both color difference formulas. [Formula: see text] contributes more than 50% (53.2-82.4% range) to the [Formula: see text] value. This contribution depends on the shade guide used and the quality of the visual rating. The evaluated shade guides exhibited visual coverage errors above acceptability thresholds, largely due to the contribution of the instrumental coverage error to the visual coverage error. It necessary to further improve commercially available dental shade guides to facilitate achievement of satisfactory esthetics results in clinical practice.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35639206
doi: 10.1007/s00784-022-04556-0
pii: 10.1007/s00784-022-04556-0
pmc: PMC9474559
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
5961-5968Subventions
Organisme : Junta de Andalucía
ID : P20-00200
Organisme : Junta de Andalucía
ID : A.TEP.280.UGR18
Organisme : Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovación y Universidades
ID : PGC2018-101904-A-I00
Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
J Esthet Restor Dent. 2015 Mar-Apr;27 Suppl 1:S1-9
pubmed: 25886208
J Prosthet Dent. 2000 Apr;83(4):418-23
pubmed: 10756291
J Clin Diagn Res. 2016 Feb;10(2):ZC72-4
pubmed: 27042590
J Dent. 2010;38 Suppl 2:e2-16
pubmed: 20621154
Eur J Esthet Dent. 2011 Spring;6(1):94-102
pubmed: 21403930
J Prosthet Dent. 2007 Aug;98(2):110-9
pubmed: 17692592
J Dent. 2021 Feb;105:103560
pubmed: 33352224
Materials (Basel). 2022 Jan 08;15(2):
pubmed: 35057185
J Dent. 2010;38 Suppl 2:e65-70
pubmed: 20659526
J Prosthodont. 2007 Sep-Oct;16(5):352-6
pubmed: 17559535
J Prosthodont. 2007 Jul-Aug;16(4):269-76
pubmed: 17451478
J Prosthet Dent. 2016 Jul;116(1):91-7
pubmed: 26851189
J Dent. 2014 Jun;42(6):742-5
pubmed: 24140995
J Prosthodont. 2007 Mar-Apr;16(2):93-100
pubmed: 17362418
J Prosthet Dent. 2009 Mar;101(3):193-9
pubmed: 19231572
Clin Oral Investig. 2012 Jun;16(3):945-9
pubmed: 21830176
J Adv Prosthodont. 2015 Dec;7(6):413-22
pubmed: 26816571
J Esthet Restor Dent. 2021 Sep;33(6):865-873
pubmed: 33125179
J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2012 Dec;12(4):222-30
pubmed: 24293919
J Dent. 2009;37 Suppl 1:e15-20
pubmed: 19329240
Dent Mater. 2016 Jan;32(1):82-92
pubmed: 26631341
J Esthet Restor Dent. 2017 Apr;29(2):E24-E32
pubmed: 28371095
Int J Prosthodont. 1991 Jan-Feb;4(1):45-50
pubmed: 2012670
Clin Oral Investig. 2017 Dec;21(9):2863-2871
pubmed: 28265772
Acta Stomatol Croat. 2016 Mar;50(1):34-9
pubmed: 27688424
J Esthet Restor Dent. 2019 Mar;31(2):103-112
pubmed: 30891913
J Esthet Restor Dent. 2018 Sep;30(5):408-414
pubmed: 30267604
Acta Stomatol Croat. 2015 Jun;49(2):112-8
pubmed: 27688393
J Esthet Restor Dent. 2021 Mar;33(2):364-370
pubmed: 32573090
J Contemp Dent Pract. 2011 Jan 01;12(1):19-23
pubmed: 22186685
Contemp Clin Dent. 2018 Jul-Sep;9(3):395-399
pubmed: 30166833