ABSTRACT
Color assessment remains a challenging aspect of esthetic dentistry. This study aimed to evaluate inter-operator agreement and accuracy in assessing shade parameters and to investigate the effect of different clinical backgrounds of the operators under different lighting conditions. Three veneers with a single shade (VITA VM7, shade 2M2: VITA Zahnfabrik, Bad Säckingen) and different shade characteristics (lustre, translucency and opacity) were assessed by 24 operators with different backgrounds using natural and color-corrected light (Trueshade, Interempresas Media, S.L.U. - Grupo Nova Àgora, Spain). Shade assessment accuracy was only 5.5% using natural light and 9.7% using Trueshade. The majority of operators identified value and hue correctly, although chroma was mostly identified incorrectly. The most accurate assessments were recorded by technicians, and translucency was the characteristic to be least accurately recorded. Inter-operator agreement of shade was better with Trueshade compared without Trueshade, although group agreements of shade characteristics were higher without Trueshade for lustre and opacity, but not for translucency. Operators showed limited agreement and poor accuracy in assessing shade and shade characteristics and the clinical background had an effect on shade selection. Technicians were more reliable in shade assessment. Trueshade could be a promising tool to improve shade assessment outcomes.
