STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Fracture strength of interim fixed partial prosthesis is of great concern, especially in long-span restorations or areas of heavy occlusal stress. PURPOSE: Effects of a plasma-treated woven polyethylene fiber (Ribbond) on the fracture strength of polymethyl methacrylate (Coldpac) and a resin-based two-phase curing provisional restorative material (Provipont DC) were evaluated. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A polyvinyl siloxane template was used to fabricate three-unit posterior provisional prostheses on a stainless steel die with two abutments 22 mm apart. The reinforced groups were fabricated by affixing 3 mm wide pieces of fiber treated with methyl methacrylate monomer or polyisocyanate (activator part of Provipont DC) on the occlusal surfaces of abutments. The interim materials were mixed, according to the manufacturers' specifications, and placed in the template. The template was pressed on the die and held secure until complete setting of the material occurred by light curing (Provipont DC) or autopolymerization (PMMA). The specimens were divided into 4 groups of 10 each (A, reinforced Provipont DC; B, unreinforced Provipont DC; C, reinforced PMMA; and D, unreinforced PMMA). A central compressive load force was exerted on the specimen to determine the fracture load of the restorations. RESULTS: The data revealed mean fracture loads of A, 65.59 +/- 11.27 kg; B, 46.59 +/- 14.84 kg; C, 53.46 +/- 7.76 kg; and D, 49.86 +/- 14.44 kg. CONCLUSION: Plasma-treated polyethylene reinforced PMMA restorations showed no significant increase in fracture loads when compared with unreinforced restorations (p > 0.10), whereas reinforced resin-based restorations revealed significantly higher fracture loads (p < 0.01) than the unreinforced resin-based and PMMA provisional restorations.
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Fracture strength of interim fixed partial prosthesis is of great concern, especially in long-span restorations or areas of heavy occlusal stress. PURPOSE: Effects of a plasma-treated woven polyethylene fiber (Ribbond) on the fracture strength of polymethyl methacrylate (Coldpac) and a resin-based two-phase curing provisional restorative material (Provipont DC) were evaluated. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A polyvinyl siloxane template was used to fabricate three-unit posterior provisional prostheses on a stainless steel die with two abutments 22 mm apart. The reinforced groups were fabricated by affixing 3 mm wide pieces of fiber treated with methyl methacrylate monomer or polyisocyanate (activator part of Provipont DC) on the occlusal surfaces of abutments. The interim materials were mixed, according to the manufacturers' specifications, and placed in the template. The template was pressed on the die and held secure until complete setting of the material occurred by light curing (Provipont DC) or autopolymerization (PMMA). The specimens were divided into 4 groups of 10 each (A, reinforced Provipont DC; B, unreinforced Provipont DC; C, reinforced PMMA; and D, unreinforced PMMA). A central compressive load force was exerted on the specimen to determine the fracture load of the restorations. RESULTS: The data revealed mean fracture loads of A, 65.59 +/- 11.27 kg; B, 46.59 +/- 14.84 kg; C, 53.46 +/- 7.76 kg; and D, 49.86 +/- 14.44 kg. CONCLUSION: Plasma-treated polyethylene reinforced PMMA restorations showed no significant increase in fracture loads when compared with unreinforced restorations (p > 0.10), whereas reinforced resin-based restorations revealed significantly higher fracture loads (p < 0.01) than the unreinforced resin-based and PMMA provisional restorations.