R Richmond1, T V Macfarlane, J F McCord. 1. The University Dental Hospital of Manchester, Higher Cambridge Street, M15 6HF Manchester, UK. mdtmszrr@den.scg.man.ac.uk
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to evaluate the abrasion resistance and surface roughness of two injection-molded poly(methylmethacrylate) denture base materials (SR-Ivocap 'Plus', Ipsyl 60 RV), and also one compression-molded material (Trevalon). A fourth group of specimens (prepared from Trevalon using the injection-molding procedure) was compared to the compression-molded specimens. METHODS: Ten specimens were prepared according to manufacturers' instructions. An experiment involving toothbrush and dentifrice abrasion was performed on all specimens from each of the materials and the cumulative percentage weight-loss was calculated after 100,000 brush strokes. A series of surface roughness profile measurements were also obtained from each specimen within the groups. The data were analysed by using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. A level of significance of 0.017 was set in order to adjust for multiple comparisons between the three sets of materials. RESULTS: There was found to be no statistically significant difference between the three groups of materials in terms of percentage weight-loss, and no statistically significant difference between the Trevalon specimens when injection-molded or compression-molded. In terms of surface roughness, however, SR-Ivocap 'Plus' recorded the lowest surface roughness profile of the three groups. It was found that there was a statistically significant difference (P<0.017) between this material and Ipsyl RV 60 (producing the highest roughness), and compression-molded Trevalon. Furthermore, there was found to be no statistically significant difference between injection-molded and compression-molded specimens of Trevalon with regard to surface texture. SIGNIFICANCE: From a clinical standpoint, the surface roughness results suggest SR-Ivocap 'Plus' to be the material most likely to produce the least suitable substrate for the accumulation of denture plaque.
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to evaluate the abrasion resistance and surface roughness of two injection-molded poly(methylmethacrylate) denture base materials (SR-Ivocap 'Plus', Ipsyl 60 RV), and also one compression-molded material (Trevalon). A fourth group of specimens (prepared from Trevalon using the injection-molding procedure) was compared to the compression-molded specimens. METHODS: Ten specimens were prepared according to manufacturers' instructions. An experiment involving toothbrush and dentifrice abrasion was performed on all specimens from each of the materials and the cumulative percentage weight-loss was calculated after 100,000 brush strokes. A series of surface roughness profile measurements were also obtained from each specimen within the groups. The data were analysed by using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. A level of significance of 0.017 was set in order to adjust for multiple comparisons between the three sets of materials. RESULTS: There was found to be no statistically significant difference between the three groups of materials in terms of percentage weight-loss, and no statistically significant difference between the Trevalon specimens when injection-molded or compression-molded. In terms of surface roughness, however, SR-Ivocap 'Plus' recorded the lowest surface roughness profile of the three groups. It was found that there was a statistically significant difference (P<0.017) between this material and Ipsyl RV 60 (producing the highest roughness), and compression-molded Trevalon. Furthermore, there was found to be no statistically significant difference between injection-molded and compression-molded specimens of Trevalon with regard to surface texture. SIGNIFICANCE: From a clinical standpoint, the surface roughness results suggest SR-Ivocap 'Plus' to be the material most likely to produce the least suitable substrate for the accumulation of denture plaque.
Authors: Ll Nogués; J Martinez-Gomis; C Molina; M Peraire; J Salsench; P Sevilla; F J Gil Journal: J Mater Sci Mater Med Date: 2008-04-04 Impact factor: 3.896