Clinical Shade Matching of Dental Ceramics Using Digital Devices: A Systematic Review

Purpose of Review This systematic review critically evaluated the clinical accuracy of digital shade-selection devices compared with the visual shade-selection method for ceramic restorations, with consideration of current evidence and emerging trends in digital dentistry. Recent Findings Across the three included clinical studies, digital shade-selection methods generally yielded lower author-reported color differences (ΔE) and greater consistency in shade selection than the visual shade-selection method. Because the color-difference equation was not consistently specified, formula-specific clinical thresholds could not be applied uniformly. The small evidence base and variation in devices, protocols, and outcome reporting preclude firm conclusions regarding replacement of visual assessment. Emerging smartphone-based approaches and artificial intelligence-assisted systems warrant further clinical validation. Summary Available clinical evidence suggests that digital shade-selection devices may improve shade-matching accuracy and consistency when used as adjuncts to the visual shade-selection method. The evidence does not establish that digital devices can replace clinician-based visual assessment. Only three in vivo studies were available, with methodological variation across devices, protocols, restorative materials, and outcomes. Standardized clinical protocols, explicit reporting of color-difference equations, and well-designed randomized clinical trials are needed. Future research should also evaluate the cost-effectiveness and clinical applicability of newer digital and artificial intelligence-assisted systems.