Reliability and accuracy of four dental shade-matching devices

Kim-Pusateri, Seungyee; Brewer, Jane D.; Davis, Elaine L.; Wee, Alvin G.

doi:10.1016/s0022-3913(09)60028-7

Cited by 270 publications

(300 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

261

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The a* value defines green (negative a*) to red (positive a*) colors, while the b* value defines blue (negative b*) to yellow (positive b*) colors. 2,14,15 Delta E (DE) describes the color difference between two specimens and is calculated using the following formula 2 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

In Vitro and In Vivo Evaluations of Three Computer-Aided Shade Matching Instruments

Yuan¹,

Sun²,

Fu³

et al. 2012

Operative Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Shadepilot was the only instrument tested in the present study that showed high accuracy and reliability both in vitro and in vivo. As different L*a*b* values and shade matching results were reported using various instruments for the same tooth, a combination of the evaluated shade matching instruments and visual shade confirmation is recommended for clinical use. SUMMARYThis study evaluated the accuracy and reliability of three computer-aided shade matching instruments (Shadepilot, VITA Easyshade, and ShadeEye NCC) using both in vitro and in vivo models. The in vitro model included the measurement of five VITA Classical shade guides. The in vivo model utilized three instruments to measure the central region of the labial surface of maxillary right central incisors of 85 people. The accuracy and reliability of the three instruments in these two evaluating models were calculated. Significant differences were observed in the accuracy of instruments both in vitro and in vivo. No significant differences were found in the reliability of instruments between and within the in vitro and the in vivo groups. VITA Easyshade was significantly different in accuracy between in vitro and in vivo models, while no significant difference was found for the other two instruments. Shadepilot was the only , 2012, 37-3, 219-227 instrument tested in the present study that showed high accuracy and reliability both in vitro and in vivo. Significant differences were observed in the L*a*b* values of the 85 natural teeth measured using three instruments in the in vivo assessment. The pair-agreement rates of shade matching among the three instruments ranged from 37.7% to 48.2%, and the incidence of identical shade results shared by all three instruments was 25.9%. As different L*a*b* values and shade matching results were reported for the same tooth, a combination of the evaluated shade matching instruments and visual shade confirmation is recommended for clinical use.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…8,15 In spectrophotometers, the intensity of light reflected from a specimen is measured for all visible spectrum wavelengths. 14,15 Ishikawa-Nagai and others [10][11][12] have reported computer-aided spectrophotometers as an excellent instrumental method for color matching in porcelain restorations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

In Vitro and In Vivo Evaluations of Three Computer-Aided Shade Matching Instruments

Yuan¹,

Sun²,

Fu³

et al. 2012

Operative Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The in vivo and in vitro models used in this study to evaluate repeatability and accuracy of an intraoral spectrophotometers have already been accepted and published (1,(19)(20)(21).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Boja je fenomen vizualne percepcije što reagira na svjetlost koja se odbila ili je prošla kroz neki objekt (1). Prirodna boja zuba rezultat je kombinacije svjetla koje se odbija od površine cakline i svjetla koje se raspršuje i odbija od površine cakline i dentina (2).…”

Section: Uvodunclassified