Loading…

Perceptibility and acceptability of lightness difference of a single maxillary central incisor

Objectives The aim of this study was to assess the lightness difference perceptibility and acceptability thresholds, for a single maxillary central incisor, and to investigate possible differences in these thresholds regarding the direction (+ΔL* vs. −ΔL*), the observer group (dentists vs. layperson...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry 2024-07, Vol.36 (7), p.1068-1074
Main Authors: Ntovas, Panagiotis, Diamantopoulou, Sofia, Johnston, William Michael, Papazoglou, Efstratios
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Objectives The aim of this study was to assess the lightness difference perceptibility and acceptability thresholds, for a single maxillary central incisor, and to investigate possible differences in these thresholds regarding the direction (+ΔL* vs. −ΔL*), the observer group (dentists vs. laypersons), and the gender and age of the observers. Materials and Methods A series of images with varying lightness (L*), were created by altering the right maxillary central incisor of a male Caucasian, on a frontal view full‐portrait image. Digital modification of one central incisor by 1 ΔL* unit resulted in 15 different images: one control, seven with increased and seven with decreased lightness. The images were presented in random order, on a digitally calibrated monitor, to 158 observers, grouped into 79 dentists, and 79 laypersons, who were asked to evaluate every image and answer whether they perceive a difference and if yes, whether they accept this difference. A multifactorial analysis of covariance was performed to analyze the perception and acceptance of any difference in the central incisors and to estimate the thresholds. The statistical significance level was α = 0.05. Results Overall, the magnitude of ΔL*, direction of ΔL*, observer group and age were each significant (p 
ISSN:1496-4155
1708-8240
1708-8240
DOI:10.1111/jerd.13245