Paravina Rade D
Department of Restorative Dentistry and Biomaterials, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Dental Branch, 77030-3402, USA.
Int J Prosthodont. 2002 Nov-Dec;15(6):528-34.
This study evaluated a newly developed visual shade-matching apparatus, Shademat Visual+, as well as the influence of tab arrangement, clinician gender, and years in practice on shade-matching quality.
A group of 129 color-normal evaluators-dental students and general dentists-matched the shade of four ceramometal crowns using the Vitapan Classical shade guide. Crowns were positioned onto the upper member of an artificial head and fastened to the headrest of the dental chair or Shademat Visual+. Shade tabs were arranged according to the manufacturer's suggestion or according to deltaE* in relation to the "lightest" tab and divided into groups (alternative arrangement). The evaluators matched the shade of four ceramometal crowns both in daylight and using the Shademat Visual+ artificial light source. The color coordinates were determined using digital image analysis. Based on deltaE* values, each shade-matching result was ranked from 1 (the worst match) to 16 (the best match) points.
The evaluators achieved a better result in Shademat Visual+ trials than in daylight trials (13.2 points vs 12.4 points; P < .001). For the same ceramometal crown, 12.7 points were recorded in daylight trials with the manufacturer-suggested arrangement, and 13.7 were recorded with the alternative arrangement (P< .001). Corresponding values for Shademat Visual+ trials were 13.6 points and 14.6 points, respectively (P< .001). Female-male and student-dentist evaluator differences were not significant.
The Shademat Visual+ apparatus enabled better shade-matching results than daylight. The alternative tab arrangement enabled better results than the manufacturer-suggested one. Gender and years in practice did not influence shade-matching quality.
本研究评估了一种新开发的视觉比色设备Shademat Visual+，以及标签排列、临床医生性别和从业年限对比色质量的影响。
一组129名色觉正常的评估者——牙科学生和普通牙医——使用维他经典比色板对四个金属烤瓷冠进行比色。将冠放置在仿真人头的上部部件上，并固定在牙科椅或Shademat Visual+的头枕上。比色标签根据制造商的建议排列，或根据与“最浅”标签的色差ΔE排列，并分成几组（交替排列）。评估者在日光下和使用Shademat Visual+的人工光源下对四个金属烤瓷冠进行比色。使用数字图像分析确定颜色坐标。根据ΔE值，将每个比色结果从1分（最差匹配）到16分（最佳匹配）进行排名。
评估者在Shademat Visual+试验中的结果优于日光试验（13.2分对12.4分；P < .001）。对于同一金属烤瓷冠，在日光试验中，按照制造商建议的排列方式记录的分数为12.7分，交替排列记录的分数为13.7分（P < .001）。Shademat Visual+试验的相应分数分别为13.6分和14.6分（P < .001）。女性与男性评估者以及学生与牙医评估者之间的差异不显著。
Shademat Visual+设备比日光能实现更好的比色结果。交替的标签排列方式比制造商建议的方式能产生更好的结果。性别和从业年限对比色质量没有影响。
