Accuracy and repeatability of different intraoral instruments on shade determination compared to visual shade selection

Abstract

Objective To evaluate the accuracy and repeatability of intraoral instruments used for shade determination compared to visual shade selection (VSS). Materials and Methods A total of 20 subjects and 10 observers, balanced by gender, participated in the study. Observers performed VSS of the upper right central incisor from each subject. Instrumental shade determination of the same teeth was performed using a spectrophotometer (Easyshade V) and intraoral scanners (CEREC Omnicam, Primescan, Trios 3 and Trios 4). Vita Classical shade nomenclature was used to record the shade designation for all instruments and VSS. The accuracy of the instruments was determined by comparing the instrument readings with the most frequent visual shade selected. The percentage of accuracy was obtained by comparing the number of agreements with the number of comparisons. The percentage of repeatability was obtained by comparing the number of repeated shades with the number of shade measurements in each group. Accuracy was compared using Cochran Q test followed by pairwise comparisons using multiple McNemar's tests with Bonferroni correction. Repeatability of the instruments was evaluated using Cronbach's alpha. Results Omnicam showed a significant lower accuracy than the other instruments (p < 0.05). No statistical difference on repeatability was found among the different instruments (p > 0.05). It was not found any statistical differences for VSS accuracy among the observers (p = 0.437) and between genders (p = 0.867). Conclusion Instrumental repeatability (≥75%) and similar accuracy between the best performed instruments (69%–77.5%) and the observers performance (65%–90%) supports the use of high‐performance instruments for dental shade determination. Clinical Significance Most instruments (Easyshade V, Primescan, Trios 3, and Trios 4) showed similar accuracy performance to observers in the VSS.

In‐vivo repeatability of three intra‐oral spectrophotometers

“…While numerous researchers have analyzed the repeatability and accuracy of intra-oral measuring devices, 3,11,[16][17][18][19][22][23][24][25] a recent systematic review states that further in vivo research is needed to improve the quality of available data. 26 Easyshade devices are known to be both accurate and with high repeatability.…”

Effect of different intraoral scanners and scanbody splinting on accuracy of scanning implant‐supported full arch fixed prosthesis

“…13 Throughout the years, they have not only solidified their reputation in accurately scanning various preparation designs and tooth geometry, 14 but they have also established their reliability in shade determination. 15 However, IOS presented errors in full arch scanning, due to their limited reference points and the absence of anatomic irregularities. 16,17 Moreover, three-dimensional visualization and mathematical interpretation of multiple scan bodies were indistinguishable by the IOS, which resulted in failure to obtain accurate digital impressions due to their identical geometry.…”

“…IOS have greatly developed since their first introduction in the 1980s 13 . Throughout the years, they have not only solidified their reputation in accurately scanning various preparation designs and tooth geometry, 14 but they have also established their reliability in shade determination 15 …”

Effect of different span lengths with different total occlusal convergences on the accuracy of intraoral scanners

“…In recent years, the employment of digital techniques in dentistry has evolved remarkably. [1][2][3][4] Examples encompass computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM). 5 Obtaining a digital scan using an intraoral scanner (IOS) is the first step of this digital workflow.…”

“…In recent years, the employment of digital techniques in dentistry has evolved remarkably 1–4 . Examples encompass computer‐aided design and computer‐aided manufacturing (CAD–CAM) 5 .…”