Steve Armstrong1, Lorenzo Breschi2, Mutlu Özcan3, Frank Pfefferkorn4, Marco Ferrari5, Bart Van Meerbeek6. 1. Department of Operative Dentistry, College of Dentistry and Dental Clinics, University of Iowa, USA. Electronic address: steven-armstrong@uiowa.edu. 2. Department of Biomedical and Neuromotor Sciences, DIBINEM, University of Bolgna, Italy. Electronic address: lorenzo.breschi@unibo.it. 3. Dental Materials Unit, Center for Dental and Oral Medicine, Clinic for Rixed and Removable Prosthodontics and Dental Materials Science, University of Zurich, Switzerland. Electronic address: mutluozcan@hotmail.com. 4. Dental Research, Clinical Affairs, Dentsply Sirona Restorative, Germany. Electronic address: Frank.Pfefferkorn@dentsplysirona.com. 5. Department of Prosthodontics and Dental Materials, University of Siena, Italy. Electronic address: ferrarm@gmail.com. 6. Department of Oral Health Sciences, Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium. Electronic address: bart.vanmeerbeek@med.kuleuven.ac.be.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: An ideal dental adhesive should provide retentive strength, marginal seal, be relatively simple to achieve and demonstrate clinical durability. Future improvements in adhesive bonding to tooth structure require in vitro test methods that provide reliable data for materials development and/or evaluation of experimental variables. The objective of this project was to identify a test method that is relatively easy to perform, repeatable and ultimately useful for predicting clinical outcomes. METHODS: The Academy of Dental Materials initiated a project to develop and distribute guidance documents on laboratory test methods that are useful for the evaluation of dental adhesives and cements, composite resins and ceramics. RESULTS: The dental adhesive sub-group has identified the micro-tensile bond strength test, especially after subjecting the specimens to a durability challenge, as currently the best practical surrogate measure of dental composite restoration retention. CONCLUSION: The following μTBS guidance is meant to aid the researcher in conducting the μTBS test. The authors, while recognizing the limitations of a static, strength-based test method, welcome comments and suggestions for improvements of this guidance document in future revisions.
OBJECTIVE: An ideal dental adhesive should provide retentive strength, marginal seal, be relatively simple to achieve and demonstrate clinical durability. Future improvements in adhesive bonding to tooth structure require in vitro test methods that provide reliable data for materials development and/or evaluation of experimental variables. The objective of this project was to identify a test method that is relatively easy to perform, repeatable and ultimately useful for predicting clinical outcomes. METHODS: The Academy of Dental Materials initiated a project to develop and distribute guidance documents on laboratory test methods that are useful for the evaluation of dental adhesives and cements, composite resins and ceramics. RESULTS: The dental adhesive sub-group has identified the micro-tensile bond strength test, especially after subjecting the specimens to a durability challenge, as currently the best practical surrogate measure of dental composite restoration retention. CONCLUSION: The following μTBS guidance is meant to aid the researcher in conducting the μTBS test. The authors, while recognizing the limitations of a static, strength-based test method, welcome comments and suggestions for improvements of this guidance document in future revisions.