Suppr超能文献

光源、偏振、教育及培训对比色质量的影响。

Influence of light source, polarization, education, and training on shade matching quality.

作者信息

Clary Jacqueline A, Ontiveros Joe C, Cron Stanley G, Paravina Rade D

机构信息

Resident, Department of Restorative Dentistry and Prosthodontics, University of Texas School of Dentistry at Houston, Houston, Texas.

Professor, Department of Restorative Dentistry and Prosthodontics, University of Texas School of Dentistry at Houston, Houston, Texas.

出版信息

J Prosthet Dent. 2016 Jul;116(1):91-7. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.12.008. Epub 2016 Feb 3.

Abstract

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Many factors influence the quality of shade selection, and isolating how significantly each of these factors influences results is difficult.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare results of shade matching using handheld lights with or without a polarizing filter with results obtained using a professional viewing booth and to analyze the influence of education and training on shade selection outcome.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 96 third-year dental students (evaluators) were randomly separated into 4 groups. Each group was assigned 1 of 2 handheld shade-matching devices (lights) with or without a polarizing filter. Each group performed a shade matching exercise using the handheld light or a professional viewing booth. The exercise consisted of matching shade tabs placed in a typodont to a commercial shade guide. Each group repeated this procedure 4 times over a 9-week period. A lecture on shade matching was presented at the fifth week of the study, between "before" and "after" shade matching procedures.

RESULTS

Shade matching scores with handheld lights (7.8) were higher than scores of shade matching with the viewing booth (7.2). The mean scores for before (7.2) and after (7.8) shade matching (with education and training in between) were significantly different. The combined effect of light and education and training improved the shade matching score by 1.2, from 6.8 in the before sessions using the viewing booth to 8.0 in the after sessions using handheld lights. A 21% increase in the number of evaluators who selected 1 of 4 best matches was recorded, 10% for handheld lights versus viewing booth after education and training versus before sessions and 11% between after sessions using handheld lights versus before sessions using viewing booth.

CONCLUSIONS

Within the limits of the study, the shade matching scores with handheld lights were significantly better than the results obtained using a viewing booth (P<.01). Using a handheld light with or without a polarizing filter did not influence shade matching results. Mean shade matching scores were significantly better after education and training (P<.01). Light combined with education and training resulted in the greatest increase in shade matching quality.

摘要

问题陈述

许多因素会影响比色的质量,而确定这些因素各自对比色结果的影响程度却很困难。

目的

本体外研究的目的是比较使用带或不带偏光滤镜的手持光源进行比色的结果与使用专业观察箱获得的结果,并分析教育与培训对比色结果的影响。

材料与方法

总共96名三年级牙科学生(评估者)被随机分为4组。每组被分配使用2种手持比色设备(光源)中的1种,带或不带偏光滤镜。每组使用手持光源或专业观察箱进行比色练习。该练习包括将放置在牙模型上的比色片与商业比色板进行匹配。每组在9周内重复此过程4次。在研究的第五周,即在“前”和“后”比色程序之间,举办了一场关于比色的讲座。

结果

使用手持光源的比色分数(7.8)高于使用观察箱的比色分数(7.2)。比色(前)(7.2)和(后)(7.8)(中间有教育与培训)的平均分数有显著差异。光源与教育和培训的综合作用使比色分数提高了1.2,从使用观察箱的前阶段的6.8提高到使用手持光源的后阶段的8.0。记录显示,选择4个最佳匹配之一的评估者数量增加了21%,教育和培训后使用手持光源与观察箱相比,与前阶段相比增加了10%,使用手持光源的后阶段与使用观察箱的前阶段相比增加了11%。

结论

在本研究的范围内,使用手持光源的比色分数显著优于使用观察箱获得的结果(P<0.01)。使用带或不带偏光滤镜的手持光源不会影响比色结果。教育和培训后的平均比色分数显著更好(P<0.01)。光源与教育和培训相结合导致比色质量提高幅度最大。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验