OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review on the masking ability of discolored substrates, analyzing the capacity and quality of the response produced by the different methodologies and techniques applied to overcome this clinical challenge. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. The electronic search was conducted in MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science databases, without date restriction. In vitro studies, written in English, applying different methodologies to evaluate masking ability were included. The variables of interest were: type, color and thickness of the restorative and/or cement material; use of pigments in the restorative material and/or cement; color of the substrate; and background color used for the evaluations. RESULTS: Database search retrieved 307 eligible papers with a final inclusion of 47 published papers. Approximately 98% of the studies used ΔE, 36% used TP, and only 6% used CR to evaluate the masking ability of restorative materials. CONCLUSIONS: The most appropriate methodology to evaluate the masking ability is using color difference equations (ΔE) associated with the perceptibility and acceptability thresholds. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: As different methodologies have been used to evaluate the masking ability of esthetic restorative materials on colored substrates, there is an urgent need to reach a consensus and propose a method, which is suggested by the present systematic review.
OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review on the masking ability of discolored substrates, analyzing the capacity and quality of the response produced by the different methodologies and techniques applied to overcome this clinical challenge. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. The electronic search was conducted in MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science databases, without date restriction. In vitro studies, written in English, applying different methodologies to evaluate masking ability were included. The variables of interest were: type, color and thickness of the restorative and/or cement material; use of pigments in the restorative material and/or cement; color of the substrate; and background color used for the evaluations. RESULTS: Database search retrieved 307 eligible papers with a final inclusion of 47 published papers. Approximately 98% of the studies used ΔE, 36% used TP, and only 6% used CR to evaluate the masking ability of restorative materials. CONCLUSIONS: The most appropriate methodology to evaluate the masking ability is using color difference equations (ΔE) associated with the perceptibility and acceptability thresholds. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: As different methodologies have been used to evaluate the masking ability of esthetic restorative materials on colored substrates, there is an urgent need to reach a consensus and propose a method, which is suggested by the present systematic review.
Authors: Passent Ellakany; Marwa Madi; Nourhan M Aly; Zainb S Al-Aql; Maher AlGhamdi; Abdulrahman AlJeraisy; Adel S Alagl Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-12-18 Impact factor: 3.390