Comparison of Different Digital Color Measurement Methods on Maxillary Anterior and Canine Teeth: A Clinical Observational Study.

IF 1.1 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
N Oberück, P Leussner, S Rinke, T Kottmann, R Haak, D Ziebolz
{"title":"Comparison of Different Digital Color Measurement Methods on Maxillary Anterior and Canine Teeth: A Clinical Observational Study.","authors":"N Oberück, P Leussner, S Rinke, T Kottmann, R Haak, D Ziebolz","doi":"10.1922/EJPRD_2541Oberruck08","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This clinical observational study aimed to determine the reproducibility of digital color measurement methods of different front teeth.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Color determination was performed using two spectrophotometric systems (Easyshade Advance; ES and Shadepilot; SP) and digital photography using a camera with ring flash and gray card with subsequent evaluation using computer software (DP; Adobe Photoshop). In 50 patients, at two time points, a digital color determination was performed on maxillary central incisors (MCI) and maxillary canines (MC) by a calibrated examiner. Outcome parameters were: color difference ΔE based on CIE L*a*b* values and VITA color match given by spectrophotometers.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>SP showed significantly lower median ΔE values (⟨1.2) than ES (⟨3.5) and DP (⟨4.4), while no significant differences were found between ES and DP. For all methods, both ΔE values and VITA color showed lower reliability regarding MC compared with MCI. The ΔE examination of subareas revealed significant differences in MCI for all devices and in MC only for SP. When comparing VITA color stability, SP showed a significantly higher color match than ES (81% and 57%, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Digital color determination methods tested in the current study provided reliable results. However, there are significant differences between the devices used and the teeth examined.</p>","PeriodicalId":45686,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1922/EJPRD_2541Oberruck08","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: This clinical observational study aimed to determine the reproducibility of digital color measurement methods of different front teeth.

Methods: Color determination was performed using two spectrophotometric systems (Easyshade Advance; ES and Shadepilot; SP) and digital photography using a camera with ring flash and gray card with subsequent evaluation using computer software (DP; Adobe Photoshop). In 50 patients, at two time points, a digital color determination was performed on maxillary central incisors (MCI) and maxillary canines (MC) by a calibrated examiner. Outcome parameters were: color difference ΔE based on CIE L*a*b* values and VITA color match given by spectrophotometers.

Results: SP showed significantly lower median ΔE values (⟨1.2) than ES (⟨3.5) and DP (⟨4.4), while no significant differences were found between ES and DP. For all methods, both ΔE values and VITA color showed lower reliability regarding MC compared with MCI. The ΔE examination of subareas revealed significant differences in MCI for all devices and in MC only for SP. When comparing VITA color stability, SP showed a significantly higher color match than ES (81% and 57%, respectively).

Conclusions: Digital color determination methods tested in the current study provided reliable results. However, there are significant differences between the devices used and the teeth examined.

上颌前牙与犬牙不同数字测色方法的临床观察研究。
目的:本临床观察研究旨在确定不同门牙数字测色方法的可重复性。方法:采用两种分光光度法(Easyshade Advance;ES和Shadepilot;SP)和数码摄影,使用带环形闪光和灰卡的相机,随后使用计算机软件(DP;Adobe Photoshop)。在50例患者中,在两个时间点,由校准的检查员对上颌中切牙(MCI)和上颌犬齿(MC)进行数字颜色测定。结果参数为:色差ΔE基于CIE L*a*b*值和分光光度计给出的VITA颜色匹配。结果:SP的ΔE中位值⟨1.2)明显低于ES(⟨3.5)和DP(⟨4.4),而ES和DP之间无显著差异。在所有方法中,与MCI相比,ΔE值和VITA颜色对MC的可靠性都较低。ΔE对子区域的检查显示,所有设备的MCI和SP的MC都有显著差异。当比较VITA颜色稳定性时,SP的颜色匹配度明显高于ES(分别为81%和57%)。结论:本研究中所测试的数字颜色测定方法提供了可靠的结果。然而,所使用的设备和所检查的牙齿之间存在显著差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry is published quarterly and includes clinical and research articles in subjects such as prosthodontics, operative dentistry, implantology, endodontics, periodontics and dental materials.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信