Objective: Digital photography is used in documenting, evaluation of restorations, storage of images for future
references and also other multiple uses. Direct clinical examination is the fastest, cheapest and most commonly used method of
assessment. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the characteristics of two different composites by clinical and digital modes
of assessment. Material and Methods: Three parameters, including color, occlusal marginal adaptation, and roughness were
assessed in 30 Class I Light cure restorations using two different composites, in adults using the USPHS/Ryge criteria. All the
parameters were clinically and photographically assessed. Due to the non-uniform distribution of data, Independent Sample MannWhitney U Test was done. To study the agreement between clinical and photographic methods of assessment Kappa statistics were
used. Result: There was no significant difference in the colour, marginal adaptation and surface roughness between the two
composites. However, Ivoclar Te-Econom Plus was better than Dentsply Ceram X. Also the photographic method was better for
assessing colour and marginal adaptation. Whereas, the clinical assessment was better for surface roughness. Conclusion: Within
the limitations of the study, there was no significant difference in colour, marginal adaptation and surface roughness between the
two composites used. Further studies with larger sample sizes are needed to warrant the results of this study. Overall, the digital
photographic method provides more information about the quality of restoration compared to clinical assessment.
Key words: clinical assessment, dental restoration, digital photography, disease, health, photographic assessment, resin composite
|
