Comparing color match by conventional trial and error method with maxillofacial spectrophotometer method for the skin of Indian participants: A subjective and objective assessment

Sunayana A; Saumyendra Vikram Singh; Sunit Kumar Jurel; Lakshya Kumar; Atul Srivastava

doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2024.03.027

Comparing color match by conventional trial and error method with maxillofacial spectrophotometer method for the skin of Indian participants: A subjective and objective assessment

J Prosthet Dent. 2024 Apr 13:S0022-3913(24)00221-X. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2024.03.027. Online ahead of print.

Authors

Sunayana A¹, Saumyendra Vikram Singh², Sunit Kumar Jurel³, Lakshya Kumar⁴, Atul Srivastava⁵

Affiliations

¹ Postgraduate student, Department of Prosthodontics and Crown & Bridge, King George's Medical University, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India.
² Professor, Department of Prosthodontics and Crown & Bridge, King George's Medical University, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India. Electronic address: saumyendravsingh@rediffmail.com.
³ Professor, Department of Prosthodontics and Crown & Bridge, King George's Medical University, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India.
⁴ Professor (Junior Grade), Department of Prosthodontics and Crown & Bridge, King George's Medical University, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India.
⁵ Associate Professor, Department of Physics, University of Lucknow, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India.

PMID: 38616154
DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2024.03.027

Abstract

Statement of problem: The comparative accuracy of different color-matching methods for maxillofacial prostheses is lacking.

Purpose: This clinical study aimed to compare prosthesis color matching using the conventional trial and error method with that using the maxillofacial spectrophotometer method.

Material and methods: Fifty-four Indian participants were enrolled based on skin color and divided into Light, Medium, and Dark groups (n=18). Silicone specimens of different thicknesses were fabricated using both the conventional trial and error and maxillofacial spectrophotometer coloration methods for all participants. The color match of the specimens with natural skin was assessed subjectively and objectively using expert consensus and fiber optic spectroscopy with the CIELab color difference formula, respectively. Statistical analyzes included the Shapiro-Wilk and independent sample t tests (α=.05).

Results: The mean ΔL* (white-black axis) value for the Skin-Conventional color match difference was significantly lower and positive compared with the Skin-Spectrophotometer match (P=.090) for the sample. The mean Δb* (yellow-blue axis) value for the Skin-Conventional color difference was significantly positive compared with the Skin-Spectrophotometer match (P=.020). The mean ΔE* (color difference) for the Skin-Conventional color match was significantly lower than the Skin-Spectrophotometer value (P=.034). Expert opinion as assessed with a visual analog scale found color matching using the conventional method (7.12) to be significantly better than with the spectrophotometer (6.30). A qualitative analysis of expert opinion revealed that conventional color matching should have been less red (34.3%) and that spectrophotometer matching should have been less yellow (30.1%).

Conclusions: Across different thicknesses of silicone and Indian skin shades, color matching was significantly better for the conventional versus the maxillofacial spectrophotometer method, both objectively and subjectively. The spectrophotometer match was significantly yellower and lighter than natural skin.