The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Related articles

VOLUME 14 , ISSUE 1 ( January-February, 2013 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Shade Matching Performance of Dental Students with Three Various Lighting Conditions

Hamid Jafarzadeh, Mohammadreza Nakhaei, Jalil Ghanbarzadeh, Shirin Keyvanloo, Samin Alavi

Citation Information : Jafarzadeh H, Nakhaei M, Ghanbarzadeh J, Keyvanloo S, Alavi S. Shade Matching Performance of Dental Students with Three Various Lighting Conditions. J Contemp Dent Pract 2013; 14 (1):100-103.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1279

Published Online: 01-02-2013

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2013; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Aim

To evaluate the ability of dental students to match shades under three various light conditions.

Materials and methods

Sixty senior dental students participated in this study. All students were tested for color deficiency using Ishahara's tests. Nine classical vita shade tabs were randomly selected and their identification codes were concealed. The students were asked to match these 9 selected items by using a complete vita shade guide under three various light conditions (natural light, clinical light, and correcting light source). The chosen shade tabs were recorded and the correct matches were counted. Scores were calculated by adding the number of correct matches.

Results

The mean values of correct match scores with natural light, clinical light and correcting light source were 4.82, 4.75 and 6.82, respectively. There was no significant difference in correct matches scores between men and women, nor among various vita A, B, C and D shades.

Conclusion

The students showed a better performance in shade matching under the correcting light source than natural light and clinical light. Gender had no effect on shade matching selection and there was no difference in shade matching ability among vita A, B, C, D shades.

Clinical significance

Shade matching performance is significantly improved with correcting light source.

How to cite this article

Nakhaei M, Ghanbarzadeh J, Keyvanloo S, Alavi S, Jafarzadeh H. Shade Matching Performance of Dental Students with Three Various Lighting Conditions. J Contemp Dent Pract 2013;14(1):100-103.


PDF Share
  1. A comparison of human raters and an intraoral spectrophotometer. Oper Dent 2009;34(3):337-43.
  2. In vitro model to evaluate reliability and accuracy of a dental shadematching instrument. J Prosthet Dent 2007;98(5):353-58.
  3. Shade matching assisted by digital photography and computer software. J Prosthodont 2009;18(3):235-41.
  4. A comparison between conventional visual and spectrophotometric methods for shade selection. Quintessence Int 2009;40(9):e69-79.
  5. The role of lenticular senescence in age-related color vision changes. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2003;44(8):3698-704.
  6. Evaluating factors that affect the shade-matching ability of dentists, dental staff members and laypeople. J Am Dent Assoc 2010;141(1):71-76.
  7. Intrarater repeatability of shade selections with two shade guides. J Prosthet Dent 2003;89(1):50-53.
  8. Visual and instrumental agreement in dental shade selection: Three distinct observer populations and shade matching protocols. Dent Mater 2009;25(2):276-81.
  9. Evaluating tooth color matching ability of dental students. J Dent Educ 2010;74(9):1002-10.
  10. Comparison of the shade matching ability of dental students using two light sources. J Prosthet Dent 2006;96(6):391-96.
  11. Shadematching abilities of dental laboratory technicians using a commercial light source. J Prosthodont 2009;18(1):60-63.
  12. Does gender and experience influence shade matching quality? J Dent 2009;37 (Suppl) 1:e40-44.
  13. The influence of some different factors on the accuracy of shade selection. J Oral Rehabil 2004;31(9):900-04.
  14. Advances in color matching. Dent Clin North Am 2004;48(2):341-58.
  15. Shade matching in restorative dentistry: The science and strategies. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2003;23(5):467-79.
  16. Effect of external light conditions during matching of tooth color: An intraindividual comparison. Int J Prosthodont 2009;22(1):75-77.
  17. Influence of illuminants on the color distribution of shade guides. J Prosthet Dent 2006;96(6):402-11.
  18. Contemporary Fixed Prosthodontics. St. Louis: Mosby 2006;709-39.
  19. The influence of selected light intensities on color perception within the color range of natural teeth. J Prosthet Dent 1981;46(4):450-53.
  20. Photography in the dental practice (II). Quintessence Int Dent Dig 1983;14(8):855-58.
  21. Clinical effect of different shade guide systems on the tooth shades of ceramic-veneered restorations. Int J Prosthodont 2005;18(5):422-26.
  22. Colour correspondence of a ceramic system in two different shade guides. J Dent 2009;37(2):98-101.
  23. Clinical effect of different shade guide systems on the tooth shades of ceramic-veneered restorations. Int J Prosthodont 2005;18(5):422-26.
  24. The science of communicating the art of esthetic dentistry. Part III: precise shade communication. J Esthet Restor Dent 2001;13(3):154-62.
  25. Shade matching performance of normal and color vision-deficient dental professionals with standard daylight and tungsten illuminants. J Prosthet Dent 2010;103(3):139-47.
  26. Effect of luminance on color perception of protanopes. Vision Res 1998;38(21):3397-401.
  27. An assessment of shade taking by dental undergraduates. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2010;18(1):13-16.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.