两种便携式牙齿颜色选择和测量设备在牙齿颜色匹配和测量中的可重复性及设备间可靠性

Repeatability and interdevice reliability of two portable color selection devices in matching and measuring tooth color.

作者信息

Lagouvardos Panagiotis E, Fougia Aggeliki G, Diamantopoulou Sofia A, Polyzois Gregory L

机构信息

Department of Operative Dentistry, Dental School, University of Athens, Athens, Greece.

出版信息

J Prosthet Dent. 2009 Jan;101(1):40-5. doi: 10.1016/S0022-3913(08)60289-9.

DOI:10.1016/S0022-3913(08)60289-9

PMID:19105990

Abstract

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

There is a need to know how shade selection devices perform in matching and measuring tooth color, since these functions are usually evaluated independently and may present significant discrepancies.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate 2 devices which offer both functions to test the null hypothesis that they present no differences in their repeatability and interdevice reliability relating to the 2 functions.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Thirty-one extracted anterior human teeth were measured twice, with each of the devices (ShadeEye NCC and VITA EasyShade), by one investigator experienced and calibrated with both devices. Lab* values and shade matches to VITA Classical and Vitapan 3D-Master shade guide systems were determined for all teeth. Paired t tests and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were used to statistically analyze the data (alpha=.05).

RESULTS

The results showed that Lab* values with VITA EasyShade were significantly higher than those with ShadeEye NCC (P<.01), with a mean difference of 10.01 Delta E units. Device repeatability ICCs for measuring tooth color ranged from 0.693 to 0.929, with significant differences between devices only with respect to parameter L* (P=.042). Intradevice ICCs for matching tooth color ranged from 0.714 to 0.894, with significant differences between devices only with respect to the VITA Classical shade system (P=.042). Interdevice ICCs for measuring tooth color ranged from 0.402 to 0.486, with no significant differences between L*a*b* parameters, while interdevice matching reliability ranged from 0.189 to 0.430, with no significant differences between shade systems (P>.05).

CONCLUSIONS

All tooth color parameters were higher with the VITA EasyShade device. Measuring repeatability of the VITA EasyShade was higher than the ShadeEye NCC only for the L* parameter. Matching repeatability of the ShadeEye NCC was higher than the VITA EasyShade for the VITA Classical system. Interdevice measuring reliabilities were not different for the color parameters, but matching reliability of the VITA Classical system was higher than that of the Vitapan 3D-Master.

摘要

问题陈述

有必要了解比色设备在匹配和测量牙齿颜色方面的表现，因为这些功能通常是独立评估的，可能存在显著差异。

目的

本研究的目的是评估两种兼具这两种功能的设备，以检验它们在重复性和设备间可靠性方面与这两种功能均无差异的零假设。

材料与方法

由一名对两种设备均有经验且经过校准的研究人员，使用每种设备（ShadeEye NCC和VITA EasyShade）对31颗拔除的人前牙进行两次测量。测定所有牙齿的Lab*值以及与VITA Classical和Vitapan 3D-Master比色板系统的颜色匹配情况。采用配对t检验和组内相关系数（ICC）对数据进行统计分析（α = 0.05）。

结果

结果显示，VITA EasyShade测得的Lab*值显著高于ShadeEye NCC（P < 0.01），平均差值为10.01 ΔE单位。测量牙齿颜色的设备重复性ICC范围为0.693至0.929，仅在参数L*方面设备间存在显著差异（P = 0.042）。设备内颜色匹配的ICC范围为0.714至0.894，仅在VITA Classical比色系统方面设备间存在显著差异（P = 0.042）。测量牙齿颜色的设备间ICC范围为0.402至0.486，L*a*b*参数间无显著差异，而设备间匹配可靠性范围为0.189至0.430，比色系统间无显著差异（P > 0.05）。

结论

VITA EasyShade设备测得的所有牙齿颜色参数均较高。仅在L*参数方面，VITA EasyShade的测量重复性高于ShadeEye NCC。对于VITA Classical系统，ShadeEye NCC的匹配重复性高于VITA EasyShade。颜色参数的设备间测量可靠性无差异，但VITA Classical系统的匹配可靠性高于Vitapan 3D-Master。