Minimum color differences for discriminating mismatch between composite and tooth color

James Ragain, William M. Johnston

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

47 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine if there are differences between patients and dental professionals in their ability to identify small color differences (deltaE) in composite resin restorative materials in vitro and to determine the deltaE that would indicate acceptability of color match between a restoration and an adjacent tooth. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Subjects were asked to evaluate composite resin disks to distinguish acceptability of deltaE between disk pairs. Color difference discrimination of dental professionals groups D1 (dentists, n = 12) and D2 (dental auxiliaries, n = 12) was compared to that of dental patient groups P1 (patients, n = 12) and P2 (scientists, n = 12). Each group was pretested for normal color vision. Color differences between a standard and restoration disks of composite were measured in Colour Measurement Committee (CMC) (1:1) color units. Data were analyzed by logistic regression, and results were used to calculate a probability level for minimal acceptance or rejection of AE for all observers. Mean 50:50 deltaE replacement points (RP) for each group were obtained and analyzed by analysis of variance, and the Tukey pairwise comparison test was applied (alpha = 0.05 for all statistical analyses). RESULTS: There were significant differences found between the experimental groups (p = .020). Group D2 (mean 50:50 deltaE RP = 1.78) proved to be more discriminating in accepting differences between tooth and composite resin restorative material color than group P1 (mean 50:50 deltaE RP = 2.69). The mean 50:50 deltaE RP for all subjects was 2.29 CMC (1:1) units. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The ability to generate an excellent color match between a tooth-colored restoration and the tooth is critical to esthetic success. This study demonstrates that patients are not as discriminating in their ability to identify small color differences between composite restorations and the tooth as are dental professionals. Dental auxiliaries proved to be more discriminating in accepting differences between tooth and composite resin restorative material color than were patients.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)41-48
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry … [et al.]
Volume13
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2001
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Tooth
Color
Composite Resins
Aptitude
Dental Auxiliaries
Color Vision
Dentists
Esthetics
Analysis of Variance
Logistic Models

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Dentistry(all)

Cite this

@article{a929d3cfef7c4f3e874198353634c3c6,
title = "Minimum color differences for discriminating mismatch between composite and tooth color",
abstract = "PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine if there are differences between patients and dental professionals in their ability to identify small color differences (deltaE) in composite resin restorative materials in vitro and to determine the deltaE that would indicate acceptability of color match between a restoration and an adjacent tooth. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Subjects were asked to evaluate composite resin disks to distinguish acceptability of deltaE between disk pairs. Color difference discrimination of dental professionals groups D1 (dentists, n = 12) and D2 (dental auxiliaries, n = 12) was compared to that of dental patient groups P1 (patients, n = 12) and P2 (scientists, n = 12). Each group was pretested for normal color vision. Color differences between a standard and restoration disks of composite were measured in Colour Measurement Committee (CMC) (1:1) color units. Data were analyzed by logistic regression, and results were used to calculate a probability level for minimal acceptance or rejection of AE for all observers. Mean 50:50 deltaE replacement points (RP) for each group were obtained and analyzed by analysis of variance, and the Tukey pairwise comparison test was applied (alpha = 0.05 for all statistical analyses). RESULTS: There were significant differences found between the experimental groups (p = .020). Group D2 (mean 50:50 deltaE RP = 1.78) proved to be more discriminating in accepting differences between tooth and composite resin restorative material color than group P1 (mean 50:50 deltaE RP = 2.69). The mean 50:50 deltaE RP for all subjects was 2.29 CMC (1:1) units. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The ability to generate an excellent color match between a tooth-colored restoration and the tooth is critical to esthetic success. This study demonstrates that patients are not as discriminating in their ability to identify small color differences between composite restorations and the tooth as are dental professionals. Dental auxiliaries proved to be more discriminating in accepting differences between tooth and composite resin restorative material color than were patients.",
author = "James Ragain and Johnston, {William M.}",
year = "2001",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/j.1708-8240.2001.tb00250.x",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "13",
pages = "41--48",
journal = "Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry",
issn = "1496-4155",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Minimum color differences for discriminating mismatch between composite and tooth color

AU - Ragain, James

AU - Johnston, William M.

PY - 2001/1/1

Y1 - 2001/1/1

N2 - PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine if there are differences between patients and dental professionals in their ability to identify small color differences (deltaE) in composite resin restorative materials in vitro and to determine the deltaE that would indicate acceptability of color match between a restoration and an adjacent tooth. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Subjects were asked to evaluate composite resin disks to distinguish acceptability of deltaE between disk pairs. Color difference discrimination of dental professionals groups D1 (dentists, n = 12) and D2 (dental auxiliaries, n = 12) was compared to that of dental patient groups P1 (patients, n = 12) and P2 (scientists, n = 12). Each group was pretested for normal color vision. Color differences between a standard and restoration disks of composite were measured in Colour Measurement Committee (CMC) (1:1) color units. Data were analyzed by logistic regression, and results were used to calculate a probability level for minimal acceptance or rejection of AE for all observers. Mean 50:50 deltaE replacement points (RP) for each group were obtained and analyzed by analysis of variance, and the Tukey pairwise comparison test was applied (alpha = 0.05 for all statistical analyses). RESULTS: There were significant differences found between the experimental groups (p = .020). Group D2 (mean 50:50 deltaE RP = 1.78) proved to be more discriminating in accepting differences between tooth and composite resin restorative material color than group P1 (mean 50:50 deltaE RP = 2.69). The mean 50:50 deltaE RP for all subjects was 2.29 CMC (1:1) units. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The ability to generate an excellent color match between a tooth-colored restoration and the tooth is critical to esthetic success. This study demonstrates that patients are not as discriminating in their ability to identify small color differences between composite restorations and the tooth as are dental professionals. Dental auxiliaries proved to be more discriminating in accepting differences between tooth and composite resin restorative material color than were patients.

AB - PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine if there are differences between patients and dental professionals in their ability to identify small color differences (deltaE) in composite resin restorative materials in vitro and to determine the deltaE that would indicate acceptability of color match between a restoration and an adjacent tooth. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Subjects were asked to evaluate composite resin disks to distinguish acceptability of deltaE between disk pairs. Color difference discrimination of dental professionals groups D1 (dentists, n = 12) and D2 (dental auxiliaries, n = 12) was compared to that of dental patient groups P1 (patients, n = 12) and P2 (scientists, n = 12). Each group was pretested for normal color vision. Color differences between a standard and restoration disks of composite were measured in Colour Measurement Committee (CMC) (1:1) color units. Data were analyzed by logistic regression, and results were used to calculate a probability level for minimal acceptance or rejection of AE for all observers. Mean 50:50 deltaE replacement points (RP) for each group were obtained and analyzed by analysis of variance, and the Tukey pairwise comparison test was applied (alpha = 0.05 for all statistical analyses). RESULTS: There were significant differences found between the experimental groups (p = .020). Group D2 (mean 50:50 deltaE RP = 1.78) proved to be more discriminating in accepting differences between tooth and composite resin restorative material color than group P1 (mean 50:50 deltaE RP = 2.69). The mean 50:50 deltaE RP for all subjects was 2.29 CMC (1:1) units. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The ability to generate an excellent color match between a tooth-colored restoration and the tooth is critical to esthetic success. This study demonstrates that patients are not as discriminating in their ability to identify small color differences between composite restorations and the tooth as are dental professionals. Dental auxiliaries proved to be more discriminating in accepting differences between tooth and composite resin restorative material color than were patients.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0035749018&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0035749018&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1708-8240.2001.tb00250.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1708-8240.2001.tb00250.x

M3 - Article

VL - 13

SP - 41

EP - 48

JO - Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry

JF - Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry

SN - 1496-4155

IS - 1

ER -