{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020444978953698137, 'fraction_numerical': 0.007817197835237523, 'mean_word_length': 5.050909090909091, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
In vitro and in vivo evaluations of three computer-aided shade matching instruments.

This study evaluated the accuracy and reliability of three computer-aided shade matching instruments (Shadepilot, VITA Easyshade, and ShadeEye NCC) using both in vitro and in vivo models. The in vitro model included the measurement of five VITA Classical shade guides. The in vivo model utilized three instruments to measure the central region of the labial surface of maxillary right central incisors of 85 people. The accuracy and reliability of the three instruments in these two evaluating models were calculated. Significant differences were observed in the accuracy of instruments both in vitro and in vivo. No significant differences were found in the reliability of instruments between and within the in vitro and the in vivo groups. VITA Easyshade was significantly different in accuracy between in vitro and in vivo models, while no significant difference was found for the other two instruments. Shadepilot was the only instrument tested in the present study that showed high accuracy and reliability both in vitro and in vivo. Significant differences were observed in the L*a*b* values of the 85 natural teeth measured using three instruments in the in vivo assessment. The pair-agreement rates of shade matching among the three instruments ranged from 37.7% to 48.2%, and the incidence of identical shade results shared by all three instruments was 25.9%. As different L*a*b* values and shade matching results were reported for the same tooth, a combination of the evaluated shade matching instruments and visual shade confirmation is recommended for clinical use.