Crystaleye比色仪比色与比色板比色的临床效果对比

Comparison of clinical effect between Crystaleye shade instrument and Vita 3D master shade guide

目的:比较Crystaleye比色仪比色方法与Vita 3D Master比色板比色方法的临床应用效果。方法:对80例患者的103颗前牙采用随机分组的方法,分为两组,即比色仪组:40例患者(52颗前牙);比色板组:40例患者(51颗前牙)。分别采用Crystaleye比色仪比色方法和Vita 3D Master比色板比色方法进行临床测色。制作修复体后,在口内再用Crystaleye比色仪对修复体和对照牙分别进行测色。分别计算两组修复体与对照牙的色差(△E)并评价患者对修复体颜色的满意度。结果:比色仪组的△E为(2.97±1.64),比色板组的△E为(6.07±2.28);t检验,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。比色仪组的患者满意度整体水平高于比色板组;x2检验,差异有统计学意义。结论:Crystaleye比色仪与Vita 3D Master比色板相比:比色结果更准确,患者满意度更高。

Objective：The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical effect between Crystaleye shade instrument and Vita 3D Master shade guide.Methods：Eighty patients with 103 single anterior ceramic restorations were included in the clinical study.Those subjects were randomly assigned to 2 groups：the shade matching instrument group including 40 patients （52 anterior ceramic restorations）; the shade guide group including 40 patients （51 anterior ceramic restorations）.Crystaleye shade matching instrument and the Vita 3D Master shade guide were used to do shade matching for 80 patients who needed PFM restorations,respectively.After the restorations were manufactured,the Commission Internationale de I＇Eclairage lab parameters were tested using the spectrophotometric.And △E between the restorations and the contrast teeth were calculated.The satisfaction of patients was recorded.Results：△E rate was 2.97± 1.64 and6.07± 2.28 in the shade matching instrument group and in the shade guide group,respectively.And the difference between them was statistically significant （P〈0.05）.The satisfaction of patients of the shade instrument matching group was higher than that of the shade guide group.And the difference between them was statistically significant.（P 〈0.05） Conclusions：Crystaleye shade matching method was proved to be more accurate than shade guide matching method.And also,it provided better satisfaction than shade guide matching does.Crystaleye shade matching method can be widely used in clinic.