Publication:
The accuracy and reliability of tooth shade selection using different instrumental techniques: An in vitro study

dc.contributor.authorNattapong Sirintawaten_US
dc.contributor.authorTanyaporn Leelaratrungruangen_US
dc.contributor.authorPongsakorn Poovarodomen_US
dc.contributor.authorSirichai Kiattavorncharoenen_US
dc.contributor.authorParinya Amornsettachaien_US
dc.contributor.otherMahidol University, Faculty of Dentistryen_US
dc.contributor.otherKhon Kaen Universityen_US
dc.date.accessioned2022-08-04T08:04:28Z
dc.date.available2022-08-04T08:04:28Z
dc.date.issued2021-11-01en_US
dc.description.abstractThis study aimed to investigate and compare the reliability and accuracy of tooth shade selection in the model using 30 milled crowns via five methods: (1) digital single-lens reflex (DSLR) camera with twin flash (TF) and polarized filter (DSLR + TF), (2) DSLR camera with a ring flash (RF) and polarized filter (DSLR + RF), (3) smartphone camera with light corrector and polarized filter (SMART), (4) intraoral scanner (IOS), and (5) spectrophotometer (SPEC). These methods were compared with the control group or manufacturer’s shade. The CIE Lab values (L, a, and b values) were obtained from five of the methods to indicate the color of the tooth. Adobe Photoshop was used to generate CIE Lab values from the digital photographs. The reliability was calculated from the intra-class correlation based on two repetitions. The accuracy was calculated from; (a) ΔE calculated by the formula comparing each method to the control group, (b) study and control groups were ana-lyzed by using the Kruskal–Wallis test, and (c) the relationship between study and control groups were calculated using Spearman’s correlation. The reliability of the intraclass correlation of L, a, and b values obtained from the five methods showed satisfactory correlations ranging from 0.732–0.996, 0.887–0.994, and 0.884–0.999, respectively. The ΔE from all groups had statistically significant differences when compared to the border of clinical acceptance (ΔE = 6.8). The ΔE from DSLR + TF, DSLR + RF, SMART, and SPEC were higher than clinical acceptance (ΔE > 6.8), whereas the ΔE from IOS was 5.96 and all of the L, a, and b values were not statistically significantly different from the manufacturer’s shade (p < 0.01). The ΔE of the DSLR + RF group showed the least accuracy (ΔE = 19.98), whereas the ∆E of DSLR + TF, SMART, and SPEC showed similar accuracy ∆E (ΔE = 10.90, 10.57, and 11.57, respectively). The DSLR camera combined with a ring flash system and polarized filter provided the least accuracy. The intraoral scanner provided the highest accuracy. However, tooth shade selection deserves the combination of various techniques and a professional learning curve to establish the most accurate outcome.en_US
dc.identifier.citationSensors. Vol.21, No.22 (2021)en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.3390/s21227490en_US
dc.identifier.issn14248220en_US
dc.identifier.other2-s2.0-85118721303en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/123456789/75976
dc.rightsMahidol Universityen_US
dc.rights.holderSCOPUSen_US
dc.source.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85118721303&origin=inwarden_US
dc.subjectBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biologyen_US
dc.subjectChemistryen_US
dc.subjectComputer Scienceen_US
dc.subjectEngineeringen_US
dc.subjectPhysics and Astronomyen_US
dc.titleThe accuracy and reliability of tooth shade selection using different instrumental techniques: An in vitro studyen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dspace.entity.typePublication
mu.datasource.scopushttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85118721303&origin=inwarden_US

Files

Collections