Comparative Analysis of Visual, Light-Corrected, and Digital Shade Selection Protocols for Natural Teeth Using Vita Classical and VITA 3D-Master Tooth Guides | ||
| Ain Shams Dental Journal | ||
| Volume 37, Issue 1, March 2025, Pages 279-288 PDF (1.37 M) | ||
| Document Type: Original articles | ||
| DOI: 10.21608/asdj.2024.339659.1682 | ||
| Authors | ||
| Shara Ismail Sajini1; Mohamed Khalil Youssef1; Abdulrahman Azab2; Jumanah Hamouh3; Heba Bahgat Abdelmaksoud* 4 | ||
| 1Department of Restorative Dentistry, Restorative Dentistry Clinics University Dental Hospital Faculty of Dentistry King Abdulaziz | ||
| 2Faculty of Dentistry, King Abdulaziz University | ||
| 3Faculty of Dentistry, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia | ||
| 4Conservative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Suez Canal University, Ismailia, Egypt. Department of Restorative Dentistry, Restorative Dentistry Clinics University Dental Hospital Faculty of Dentistry King Abdulaziz | ||
| Abstract | ||
| Aim: To compare the accuracy and reliability of three shade selection protocols: visual shade selection, visual shade selection with a light-correcting device equipped with a polarization filter, and digital shade selection using VITA Classical (VC) and VITA 3D Master (V3D) shade guides on natural teeth. Materials and methods: This study compared the accuracy of three shade selection protocols: visual selection under daylight (VSS), visual selection with a light-correcting device using a polarization filter (VWL), and digital selection (DSS) using the VITA Easyshade Advance spectrophotometer. Two experienced dentists used the spectrophotometer to determine the upper right central incisor and canine reference shades. One hundred participants selected shades for these teeth using the VITA Classical and VITA 3D Master shade guides under the three protocols. Shades matching the reference were recorded as correct, and the accuracy of each protocol was evaluated comparatively. Results: A statistically significant difference was reported between VC and V3D, with the three tested shade selection protocols with p<0.001. No statistically significant difference was recorded between the three shade selection protocols while using VC and V3D, with p=0.261 and p=0.503, respectively. A statistically significant difference resulted between all shade selection protocols’ preferred answers, with the highest number of answers found in DSS (72%) followed by VWL (17%) and (VSS) which recorded the least number of answers (11%) (p<0.001). No statistically significant difference was observed between males and females regarding the preferred technique (p=0.580). Conclusion: DSS demonstrated the highest accuracy and participant preference, highlighting its potential as the most reliable shade selection protocol. | ||
| Keywords | ||
| Shade; VITA 3D Master; Easyshade; Spectrophotometer; Light correcting device | ||
|
Statistics Article View: 257 PDF Download: 175 |
||
