Skip to main content

Table 1 Characteristics of included studies

From: Color difference for shade determination with visual and instrumental methods: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Author

Study type

Selection method

Sample size

ΔΕ (mean ± SD) µm

Conclusions

Hampé-Kautz [8]

In vivo

1. Visual method (Vita 3D-MASTER shade guide)

2. Instrumental method (Spectrophotometer)

3. Instrumental method (TRIOS III IOS)

4. Instrumental method (CEREC Omnicam IOS)

40

2.35 ± 0.25

1.85 ± 0.26

2.75 ± 0.27

2.75 ± 0.23

Shade determination with a spectrophotometer showed the best accuracy while IOSs presented the worst results

Jorquera [9]

In vivo

1. Visual method (Vita Classical shade guide)

2. Instrumental method (digital camera with a cross-polarized filter)

3. Instrumental method (Smartphone with light-correction filter)

15

5.32 ± 0.64

2.75 ± 0.40

2.34 ± 0.42

Shade selection with a digital camera and smartphone was significantly more accurate than the visual method

Alshiddi [10]

In vivo

1. Visual method (Vita 3D-Master shade guide)

2. Instrumental method (spectrophotometer)

8

4.22 ± 1.56

3.75 ± 1.71

Shade matching with the instrumental method is significantly more accurate than the visual method

Czigola [11]

In vivo

1. Visual method (Vita 3D-Master shade guide)

2. Visual method (Vita Classical shade guide)

3. Instrumental method (spectrophotometer)

4. Instrumental method (TRIOS III IOS)

10

NR

Vita 3D-Master shade guide produced the best shade matching followed by the spectrophotometer, IOS, and Vita Classical shade guide

Mahn [12]

In vivo

1. Visual method (Vita Classical shade guide)

2. Instrumental method (digital camera with a cross-polarized filter)

60

7 ± 5.14

6.05 ± 2.17

The instrumental shade selection with a digital camera had better shade selection acceptability compared with the visual method

Alsaleh [13]

In vivo

1. Visual method (Vita Classical shade guide)

2. Instrumental method (spectrophotometer)

15

5.85 ± 2.90

5 ± 2.50

The instrumental shade assessment had better acceptability than the visual assessment

Brandt [14]

In vivo

1. Visual method (Vita 3D-Master shade guide)

2. Instrumental method (TRIOS III IOS)

107

5.52 ± 2.47

4.99 ± 2.73

The shade determination with IOS is a good alternative to visual shade selection or can be used in conjugation with it

  1. IOS, intraoral scanner; SD, standard deviation