Literature DB >> 12022454

Surface roughness of various packable composites.

Timothy M Ryba1, William J Dunn, David F Murchison.   

Abstract

Packable composite restorations have become a popular alternative to dental amalgam restorations in posterior teeth. A drawback inherent to composites is their difficulty in polishing, which often results in a dull or rough surface. This study compared the surface roughness of a resin-based hybrid composite material and five packable resin-based composites polished with either aluminum oxide disks or a rubber polishing system. Sixteen specimens of each of the six composite materials were polished with either Sof-Lex XT disks or Enhance rubber polishers followed by fine and superfine polishing pastes. The specimens were evaluated for surface roughness using surface profilometry. Mean values were calculated for each material type and method of polishing. Data were subjected to a two-way ANOVA. Post hoc comparison was accomplished using Tukey's HSD. No significant difference in surface roughness was detected among polishing techniques (p=0.067); however, a strong trend-that aluminum oxide disks provided a smoother surface than rubber polishers in five out of six materials-was noted.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12022454

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Oper Dent        ISSN: 0361-7734            Impact factor:   2.440


  12 in total

1.  Evaluation of surface characteristics of dental composites using profilometry, scanning electron, atomic force microscopy and gloss-meter.

Authors:  A Kakaboura; M Fragouli; C Rahiotis; N Silikas
Journal:  J Mater Sci Mater Med       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 3.896

2.  Clinical evaluation of two packable posterior composites: 2-year follow-up.

Authors:  T C Fagundes; T J E Barata; E Bresciani; D F G Cefaly; M F F Jorge; M F L Navarro
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2006-07-06       Impact factor: 3.573

3.  Effect of water-jet flossing on surface roughness and color stability of dental resin-based composites.

Authors:  Mohammed Alharbi; Ra'fat Farah
Journal:  J Clin Exp Dent       Date:  2020-02-01

4.  Effect of different polishing techniques on surface properties and bacterial adhesion on resin-ceramic CAD/CAM materials.

Authors:  Merve Özarslan; Dilber Bilgili Can; Nermin Hande Avcioglu; Seçil Çalışkan
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2022-04-26       Impact factor: 3.606

5.  The effect of one-step and multi-step polishing systems on surface texture of two different resin composites.

Authors:  Kusum Bashetty; Sonal Joshi
Journal:  J Conserv Dent       Date:  2010-01

6.  The effect of one-step and multi-step polishing systems on the surface roughness and microhardness of novel resin composites.

Authors:  Ugur Erdemir; Hande Sar Sancakli; Esra Yildiz
Journal:  Eur J Dent       Date:  2012-04

7.  Effect of filler particles on surface roughness of experimental composite series.

Authors:  Hanadi Yousif Marghalani
Journal:  J Appl Oral Sci       Date:  2010 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.698

8.  Effect of different finishing/polishing procedures on surface roughness of Ormocer-based and different resin composites.

Authors:  Marco Colombo; Lodovico Vialba; Riccardo Beltrami; Ricaldone Federico; Marco Chiesa; Claudio Poggio
Journal:  Dent Res J (Isfahan)       Date:  2018 Nov-Dec

9.  Coloration of provisional restoration materials: a comparison of the effects of mouth rinses and green tea.

Authors:  Canan Akay; Merve Çakırbay Tanış; Madina Gulverdiyeva
Journal:  Eur Oral Res       Date:  2018-01-01

10.  Effect of different polishing systems on the surface roughness of microhybrid composites.

Authors:  Kristine Guará Brusaca Almeida Scheibe; Karoline Guará Brusaca Almeida; Igor Studart Medeiros; José Ferreira Costa; Cláudia Maria Coêlho Alves
Journal:  J Appl Oral Sci       Date:  2009 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.698

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.