Cargando…

Comparison of photographic and conventional methods for tooth shade selection: A clinical evaluation

AIM: This study aimed to compare three different methods used for shade selection, i.e., visual method, spectrophotometer, and digital photography method. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty participants were selected from the Out Patient Department of Prosthodontics. Presence of the maxillary right centra...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Miyajiwala, Juzer S., Kheur, Mohit G., Patankar, Anuya H., Lakha, Tabrez A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5601497/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28936042
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jips.jips_342_16
_version_ 1783264397123125248
author Miyajiwala, Juzer S.
Kheur, Mohit G.
Patankar, Anuya H.
Lakha, Tabrez A.
author_facet Miyajiwala, Juzer S.
Kheur, Mohit G.
Patankar, Anuya H.
Lakha, Tabrez A.
author_sort Miyajiwala, Juzer S.
collection PubMed
description AIM: This study aimed to compare three different methods used for shade selection, i.e., visual method, spectrophotometer, and digital photography method. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty participants were selected from the Out Patient Department of Prosthodontics. Presence of the maxillary right central incisor with no history of any restorative or endodontic procedures was the primary inclusion criterion. The shade of the right maxillary central incisor was determined using all the three shade selection procedures, namely, visual, spectrophotometric, and digital photography method for all the selected participants. The shades obtained in the visual method using a shade guide were noted down for further comparisons. The spectrophotometer reported the L*, a*, and b* values along with the actual shade whereas the digital photography method reported only the L*, a*, and b* values. The agreement between the readings obtained by the three different methods was compared and subjected to appropriate statistical analysis. RESULTS: The results showed that when the three methods studied were compared, there was a statistically significant proportion of agreement between spectrophotometric and visual method (P < 0.01) with higher proportion of “yes” (agreement) and between the spectrophotometric and digital photography method (P < 0.01) with higher proportion of “yes” (agreement). Coefficient of agreement (using Kappa coefficient) between spectrophotometric and visual shades revealed a fair agreement. The mean ΔE was 1.69. There was a statistically significant difference between the proportion of ΔE more than and <2, between spectrophotometric and digital photography methods (P < 0.01) with higher proportion of <2 ΔE. Furthermore, percentage of agreement between shades obtained by the visual and spectrophotometric method showed maximum agreement with A1 shade. CONCLUSION: It was concluded that the digital photography method emerged as a reliable method for shade selection in a clinical setup.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5601497
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56014972018-07-01 Comparison of photographic and conventional methods for tooth shade selection: A clinical evaluation Miyajiwala, Juzer S. Kheur, Mohit G. Patankar, Anuya H. Lakha, Tabrez A. J Indian Prosthodont Soc Original Article AIM: This study aimed to compare three different methods used for shade selection, i.e., visual method, spectrophotometer, and digital photography method. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty participants were selected from the Out Patient Department of Prosthodontics. Presence of the maxillary right central incisor with no history of any restorative or endodontic procedures was the primary inclusion criterion. The shade of the right maxillary central incisor was determined using all the three shade selection procedures, namely, visual, spectrophotometric, and digital photography method for all the selected participants. The shades obtained in the visual method using a shade guide were noted down for further comparisons. The spectrophotometer reported the L*, a*, and b* values along with the actual shade whereas the digital photography method reported only the L*, a*, and b* values. The agreement between the readings obtained by the three different methods was compared and subjected to appropriate statistical analysis. RESULTS: The results showed that when the three methods studied were compared, there was a statistically significant proportion of agreement between spectrophotometric and visual method (P < 0.01) with higher proportion of “yes” (agreement) and between the spectrophotometric and digital photography method (P < 0.01) with higher proportion of “yes” (agreement). Coefficient of agreement (using Kappa coefficient) between spectrophotometric and visual shades revealed a fair agreement. The mean ΔE was 1.69. There was a statistically significant difference between the proportion of ΔE more than and <2, between spectrophotometric and digital photography methods (P < 0.01) with higher proportion of <2 ΔE. Furthermore, percentage of agreement between shades obtained by the visual and spectrophotometric method showed maximum agreement with A1 shade. CONCLUSION: It was concluded that the digital photography method emerged as a reliable method for shade selection in a clinical setup. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2017 /pmc/articles/PMC5601497/ /pubmed/28936042 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jips.jips_342_16 Text en Copyright: © 2017 The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Miyajiwala, Juzer S.
Kheur, Mohit G.
Patankar, Anuya H.
Lakha, Tabrez A.
Comparison of photographic and conventional methods for tooth shade selection: A clinical evaluation
title Comparison of photographic and conventional methods for tooth shade selection: A clinical evaluation
title_full Comparison of photographic and conventional methods for tooth shade selection: A clinical evaluation
title_fullStr Comparison of photographic and conventional methods for tooth shade selection: A clinical evaluation
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of photographic and conventional methods for tooth shade selection: A clinical evaluation
title_short Comparison of photographic and conventional methods for tooth shade selection: A clinical evaluation
title_sort comparison of photographic and conventional methods for tooth shade selection: a clinical evaluation
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5601497/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28936042
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jips.jips_342_16
work_keys_str_mv AT miyajiwalajuzers comparisonofphotographicandconventionalmethodsfortoothshadeselectionaclinicalevaluation
AT kheurmohitg comparisonofphotographicandconventionalmethodsfortoothshadeselectionaclinicalevaluation
AT patankaranuyah comparisonofphotographicandconventionalmethodsfortoothshadeselectionaclinicalevaluation
AT lakhatabreza comparisonofphotographicandconventionalmethodsfortoothshadeselectionaclinicalevaluation