OBJECTIVESTo evaluate the effect of shade guide training box and shade guide training software on shade matching ability of observers when used separately. To find out the difference between two training plans when the two training methods were used in combination, and to provide information on shade matching training system.

METHODSSixty-two postgraduate dental students who specialized in prosthodontics with 1 to 5 year clinical experience were enrolled in this study. At base line, each participant were asked to match 7 standard shade tabs which have been randomly chosen from Vita 3D-Master shade guide and 7 intermediate shade tabs from Vita bleached guide 3D-Master. Then the subjects were allocated to 2 groups [Toothguide Training Box (TTB) group and Toothguide Training (TT) group] according to the baseline data. Participants in group TTB received training session once a week for 3 weeks, while those in group TT received TT training session once a week for 3 weeks. All participants took a middle term shade-matching test. Then the two groups exchange the training methods and repeat the whole process, a final test was given to each participant. The elapsed time and number of accurate shade matching were recorded for each training session. Wilcoxon signed ranks test and ANOVA were used in data analysis.

RESULTSThere were no significant differences in the number of accurate shade matching (standard shade tab and the sum) between group TTB (4.4 +/- 1.3 and 5.3 +/- 1.6) and TT (4.0 +/- 1.4 and 4.9 +/- 1.5) in the middle term test with higher value found in group TTB. In the final test, the number of accurate shade matching (standard shade tab and the sum) in group TT (4.9 +/- 0.8 and 6.4 +/- 0.8) was higher than that in group TTB (4.7 +/- 1.1 and 5.8 +/- 0.9), but significant difference was found only when the sum number of accurate shade matching was compared between the two groups (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference between data from middle term test and from final test in group TTB; while in group TT, the number of accurate shade matching in the final test was significantly increased compared with that in the middle term test (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONSWhen used in combination, TT training followed by TTB training is recommended.