What question did this study set out to answer?

This research aims to assess whether a light-correcting device improves the consistency of shade selection for anterior teeth compared to conventional lighting.

May 9, 2026Open Access

Evaluation of Interexaminer Reliability in Visual Shade Matching: A Comparative Analysis of Optilume Trueshade and Conventional Lighting for Permanent Anterior Teeth

OAOmar F AlkhalifahQassim University SSShahzad Ali ShahQassim University STSabahat Ullah Khan TareenQassim University

Key Points

This research aims to assess whether a light-correcting device improves the consistency of shade selection for anterior teeth compared to conventional lighting.
Randomized cross-sectional study involving 50 adults aged 18-40 with vital maxillary incisors.
Participants were divided into two groups: Group A used conventional lighting, and Group B used Optilume Trueshade.
Three blinded dentists selected shades, and reliability was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha.
Both lighting systems achieved excellent reliability, with Cronbach’s alpha of 0.91 and overall study reliability of 0.94.
No significant differences in shade selection were noted for teeth 11, 12, and 22 among operators.
A significant discrepancy was found for tooth 21 (p = 0.002), attributed to individual operator variation rather than lighting flaws.

Abstract

Background: Achieving a lifelike color match for anterior restorations is a persistent challenge because tooth appearance is heavily influenced by illumination and observer-dependent choices. While visual matching with VITA-type guides remains the most common global approach, its reproducibility often drops under varying ambient light. Objectives: The study sought to determine whether using a light-correcting device (Optilume Trueshade, ~5,500 K; Optident Dental Products, Ilkley, West Yorkshire) meaningfully enhances interexaminer reliability when selecting shades for maxillary anterior teeth with the VITAPAN Classical A1-D4 shade guide (VITA Zahnfabrik, Germany) compared with conventional clinical lighting. Methodology: In this cross-sectional study, 50 adults (18-40 years) with vital maxillary incisors were randomized into Group A (conventional lighting) and Group B (Optilume Trueshade). Three blinded restorative dentists independently selected shades on the middle third of a randomly selected reference tooth. Reliability was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha, while shade selection differences were analyzed via Kruskal-Wallis and post hoc tests. Results: Internal consistency was excellent, with both systems achieving a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.91 and an overall study reliability of 0.94. For teeth 11, 12, and 22, no statistically significant differences in shade selection were found between operators. A significant discrepancy was observed for tooth 21 (p = 0.002); however, post hoc analysis revealed it was operator-specific rather than a flaw in the lighting system. Conclusion: Both the VITAPAN Classical guide and the Optilume Trueshade system are highly reliable tools for shade matching in restorative dentistry. Individual human factors, such as fatigue and physiological perception, remain significant variables, highlighting the need for periodic calibration and strengthened operator training.

Demander à l'IA

Bookmark

View Full Paper