Statement of problem: Visual color determination in clinics or dental offices should take place under reproducible environmental conditions. To reduce false tooth color measurements, daylight and illumination lamps (5000-7500 K) have been recommended. Those can be used either as stationary or mobile handheld illumination units. However, depending on the manufacturer, the handheld lights use different illuminance brightness, and whether the choice of unit affects shade selection is unclear.
Purpose: The purpose of this in vitro study was to determine whether the mobile handheld light-emitting diode (LED) lighting unit shows a significantly better result in visual color determination than the conventional reference lighting unit.
Material and methods: Trained preclinical dental students (N=23) with a mean ±standard deviation age of 24 ±5 years participated in the study. Two color differentiation lamps (Smile lite 1620lx and Dialite Color 4450lx) (SL and DC) were each placed at a 15-cm distance to determine the color of the shade tabs (templates, N=10) with the VITA Linear Guide 3D Master in a double-blinded study. According to the manufacturer's recommendation, polarization filters were used with the Smile lite lamp.
Results: Of N=220 shade determinations each, 31.8% (SL) and 33.2% (DC) were correct; the median (ΔE00) and interquartile range were 0.96 (±3.32) for SL and 1.35 (±3.28) for DC. The differences between the groups were not statistically significant (P=.67).
Conclusions: The results show that the use of the mobile LED illumination unit did not improve color determination compared with the reference illumination. The different illumination intensities of 980 lux (SL) with a polarizing filter or 1500 lux (DC) did not have a positive effect.
Copyright © 2022 Editorial Council for The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.