Aim: Although visual color determination is the most frequently applied method in dentistry, instrumental color analysis offers advantages like objectivity, measurability and rapidity. The aim of this study was to evaluate the natural teeth color in teeth without any restoration visually, and by using a computerized shade measuring and analyzing system in the population.
Materials and Methods: 202 patients were inspected. Before instrumental shade matching visual matching was done by the inspector with Vitapan 3D Master Shade Guide in the day light. Images were taken with computerized shade measuring and analyzing system from patients’ natural right or left maxillary incisors and canines without any restoration. Then these images were evaluated by the original software of its own.
Results: Value differences between visual and instrumental shade matching were statistically significant. Darker value levels were obtained with instrumental measurement. The distribution of hue was more reddish in instrumental examination than visual examination. Significant difference was found at cervical and middle third of the tooth in both visual and instrumental determination of chroma. Chroma of the tooth was higher at these two regions in visual assessment.
Conclusions: Teeth colors were distributed more uniform in visual shade matching compared to instrumental matching. However, some teeth shades were more common in instrumental matching. Value scores were found higher with instrumental shade matching. Individual selection of shades for each tooth and different regions of a tooth instead of a single color is considered to be a factor to increase the success of the restoration.
12. Kim-Pusateri S Brewer JD Davis EL Wee AG. Reliability and accuracy of four dental shade-matching devices. J Prosthet Dent 2009; 101:193-199.
13. Brewer JD Wee A Seghi R. Advances in color matching. Dent Clin North Am 2004; 48:v 341-58.
14. Kim-Pusateri S Brewer JD Dunford RG Wee AG. In vitro model to evaluate reliability and accuracy of a dental shadematching instrument. J Prosthet Dent 2007; 98:353-358.
15. Bayindir F Gozalo-Diaz D Kim-Pusateri S Wee AG. Incisal translucency of vital natural unrestored teeth: a clinical study. J Esthet Restor Dent 2012; 24:335-343.
16. Okubo SR Kanawati A Richards MW Childress S. Evaluation of visual and instrument shade matching. J Prosthet Dent 1998; 80:642-648.
17. Paul S Peter A Pietrobon N Hämmerle CH. Visual and spectrophotometric shade analysis of human teeth. J Dent Res 2002; 81:578-582.
18. Hugo B Witzel T Klaiber B. Comparison of in vivo visual and computer-aided tooth shade determination. Clin Oral Investig 2005; 9:244-250.
19. Klemetti E Matela AM Haag P Kononen M. Shade selection performed by novice dental professionals and colorimeter. J Oral Rehabil 2006; 33:31-35.
20. Derdilopoulou FV Zantner C Neumann K Kielbassa AM. Evaluation of visual and spectrophotometric shade analyses: a clinical comparison of 3758 teeth. Int J Prosthodont 2007; 20:414-416.
21. Della Bona A Barrett AA Rosa V Pinzetta C. Visual and instrumental agreement in dental shade selection: three distinct observer populations and shade matching protocols. Dent Mater 2009; 25:276-281.
22. Browning WD Chan DC Blalock JS Brackett MG. A comparison of human raters and an intra-oral spectrophotometer. Oper Dent 2009; 34:337-343.
23. Judeh A Al-Wahadni A. A comparison between conventional visual and spectrophotometric methods for shade selection. Quintessence Int 2009; 40:e69-79.
24. Gómez-Polo C Gómez-Polo M Celemin-Viñuela A Martínez Vázquez De Parga JA. Differences between the human eye and the spectrophotometer in the shade matching of tooth colour. J Dent 2014; 42:742-745.
25. Bahannan SA. Shade matching quality among dental students using visual and instrumental methods. J Dent 2014; 42:48-52.
26. Kröger E Matz S Dekiff M Tran BL Figgener L Dirksen D. In vitro comparison of instrumental and visual tooth shade determination under different illuminants. J Prosthet Dent 2015; 114:848-855.
27. Alshiddi IF Richards LC. A comparison of conventional visual and spectrophotometric shade taking by trained and untrained dental students. Aust Dent J 2015; 60:176-181.
28. Imbery TA Geissberger M Hakim F Al-Anezi S Uram- Tuculescu S Gottlieb R Estrich CG. Evaluation of four dental clinical spectrophotometers relative to human shade observation. J Am Dent Assoc 2013; 144:1183-1186.
29. Tung FF Goldstein GR Jang S Hittelman E. The repeatability of an intraoral dental colorimeter. J Prosthet Dent 2002; 88:585-590.
30. Joiner A. Tooth colour: a review of the literature. J Dent 2004; 32 Suppl1:3-12.
31. Douglas RD. Precision of in vivo colorimetric assessments of teeth. J Prosthet Dent 1997; 77:464-470.
32. Li Q Yu H Wang YN. In vivo spectroradiometric evaluation of colour matching errors among five shade guides. J Oral Rehabil 2009; 36:65-70.
33. Cho BH Lim YK Lee YK. Comparison of the color of natural teeth measured by a colorimeter and Shade Vision System. Dent Mater 2007; 23:1307-1312.
34. Hasegawa A Ikeda I Kawaguchi S. Color and translucency of in vivo natural central incisors. J Prosthet Dent 2000; 83:418-423.
35. Russell MD Gulfraz M Moss BW. In vivo measurement of colour changes in natural teeth. J Oral Rehabil 2000; 27:786-792.
36. Jahangiri L Reinhardt SB Mehra RV Matheson PB. Relationship between tooth shade value and skin color: an observational study. J Prosthet Dent 2002; 87:149-152.
37. Dozic A Kleverlaan CJ Aartman IH Feilzer AJ. Relation in color of three regions of vital human incisors. Dent Mater 2004; 20:832-838.
38. Goodkind RJ Schwabacher WB. Use of a fiber-optic colorimeter for in vivo color measurements of 2830 anterior teeth. J Prosthet Dent 1987; 58:535-542.
39. Phelan S. Use of photographs for communicating with the laboratory in indirect posterior restorations. J Can Dent Assoc 2002; 68:239-242.
40. O’Brien WJ Hemmendinger H Boenke KM Linger JB Groh CL. Color distribution of three regions of extracted human teeth. Dent Mater 1997; 13:179-185.