Alsahafi Rashed, Almaghraby Motaz, Almasri Eyad, Banafa Abdulrahman, Marghalani Abdullah A
Department of Restorative Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, Umm Al-Qura University, Makkah, SAU.
College of Dentistry, Umm Al-Qura University, Makkah, SAU.
Cureus. 2024 Nov 9;16(11):e73338. doi: 10.7759/cureus.73338. eCollection 2024 Nov.
Recently, dental esthetics have increasingly emphasized appearance, with tooth shade selection complicated by the enamel and dentin's translucency and opacity. Smartphone cameras are useful for shade matching. Currently, no study has directly compared the accuracy of this method. Therefore, the aim of this study is to compare the accuracy of the visual method, smartphone photography, and the Vita Easyshade spectrophotometer, particularly for chroma, value, and hue.
This cross-sectional study involved a convenient sample of 82 dental students from the College of Dental Medicine at Umm Al-Qura University, including those in their 5, 6, and 7 (intern) years. The VITA classical shade guide was utilized to compare three methods of shade selection: the conventional visual method, smartphone photography, and the Vita Easyshade spectrophotometer. The percentage accuracy for each method was calculated with a 95% confidence interval (CI), using the visual method as the reference standard. Statistical comparisons of the shade selection methods, as well as gender differences, were performed using a Chi-Square test. Fisher's exact test was applied where expected cell counts were below five. Stata software was used with a significance threshold of 0.05.
The current study included 82 subjects; 42 were females and 40 were males. There was no significant difference between male and female students in the measured accuracy by using the three methods except for hue when the photo method was used (p=0.015). For chroma (p=0.094), value (p=0.965), and hue (p=0.094), the photo method was comparable in accuracy to the visual method. The accuracy was slightly higher for the photo method, but this difference was not statistically significant. The Easyshade was also comparable to the visual method in chroma (p=0.674), significantly lower when assessing value (p=0.002) and not statistically lower when assessing hue (p=0.094). Comparing the results of the same method, the accuracy of shade selection was highest for chroma, followed by value, and lowest for hue.
Within the limitations of this study, digital photography using a smartphone camera may serve as a reliable method for clinicians in shade selection during clinical practice.
近年来，牙齿美学越来越注重外观，而牙釉质和牙本质的半透明性和不透明性使牙齿颜色的选择变得复杂。智能手机相机有助于颜色匹配。目前，尚无研究直接比较该方法的准确性。因此，本研究旨在比较视觉法、智能手机摄影法和Vita Easyshade分光光度计的准确性，特别是在彩度、明度和色调方面。
本横断面研究纳入了乌姆古拉大学牙医学院82名牙科学生的便利样本，包括5年级、6年级和7年级（实习）的学生。采用VITA经典比色板比较三种选色方法：传统视觉法、智能手机摄影法和Vita Easyshade分光光度计。以视觉法作为参考标准，计算每种方法的准确率及95%置信区间（CI）。采用卡方检验对选色方法及性别差异进行统计学比较。当预期单元格计数低于5时，应用Fisher精确检验。使用Stata软件，显著性阈值设定为0.05。
本研究共纳入82名受试者，其中女性42名，男性40名。除使用摄影法时的色调外（p=0.015），使用三种方法测量的准确性在男女学生之间无显著差异。对于彩度（p=0.094）、明度（p=0.965）和色调（p=0.094），摄影法的准确性与视觉法相当。摄影法的准确性略高，但差异无统计学意义。Easyshade在彩度方面也与视觉法相当（p=0.674），在评估明度时显著较低（p=0.002），在评估色调时无统计学差异（p=0.094）。比较相同方法的结果，选色准确性在彩度方面最高，其次是明度，在色调方面最低。
在本研究的局限性范围内，使用智能手机相机进行数码摄影可作为临床医生在临床实践中选色的可靠方法。
