Comparative Analysis of Visual, Light-Corrected, and Digital Shade Selection Protocols for Natural Teeth Using Vita Classical and VITA 3D-Master Tooth Guides

Aim: To compare the accuracy and reliability of three shade selection protocols: visual ‎shade selection, visual shade selection with a light-correcting device equipped with a ‎polarization filter, and digital shade selection using VITA Classical (VC) and VITA 3D ‎Master (V3D) shade guides on natural teeth. Materials and methods: This study compared ‎the accuracy of three shade selection protocols: visual selection under daylight (VSS), ‎visual selection with a light-correcting device using a polarization filter (VWL), and digital ‎selection (DSS) using the VITA Easyshade Advance spectrophotometer. Two experienced ‎dentists used the spectrophotometer to determine the upper right central incisor and canine ‎reference shades. One hundred participants selected shades for these teeth using the VITA ‎Classical and VITA 3D Master shade guides under the three protocols. Shades matching the ‎reference were recorded as correct, and the accuracy of each protocol was evaluated ‎comparatively. Results: A statistically significant difference was reported between VC and ‎V3D, with the three tested shade selection protocols with p<0.001. No statistically ‎significant difference was recorded between the three shade selection protocols while using ‎VC and V3D, with p=0.261 and p=0.503, respectively. A statistically significant difference ‎resulted between all shade selection protocols’ preferred answers, with the highest number ‎of answers found in DSS (72%) followed by VWL (17%) and (VSS) which recorded the ‎least number of answers (11%) (p<0.001). No statistically significant difference was ‎observed between males and females regarding the preferred technique (p=0.580). ‎ Conclusion: DSS demonstrated the highest accuracy and participant preference, ‎highlighting its potential as the most reliable shade selection protocol. ‎