Literature DB >> 9610331

The effect of three finishing systems on four esthetic restorative materials.

D C Hoelscher1, A M Neme, F E Pink, P J Hughes.   

Abstract

Previous studies have investigated the finishing and smoothness of composite and traditional glass-ionomer restorations, but few have included resin-modified glass-ionomer cements or more recent finishing systems. The results of using three different finishing systems (Sof-Lex, Enhance, finishing burs) on two composites (Silux, Prisma TPH), a traditional glass ionomer (Ketac-Fil), and a resin-modified glass ionomer (Fuji II LC) were studied. Sixty samples were condensed into sectioned acrylic tubes, covered with a Mylar matrix plus a glass slide at each surface, then cured as per the manufacturers' instructions. Samples were randomized to three groups of five for each material and testing with a Surfanalyzer 4000 of unfinished samples (cured with Mylar matrix) was done to obtain baseline average surface roughness (Ra). Samples were then finished as per the manufacturers' instructions using polishing disks, abrasive impregnated disks, and finishing burs before further surface testing. Samples finished with burs and with abrasive impregnated disks were further polished using polishing paste (Prisma Gloss) and again tested. Data were analyzed with ANOVA testing and Tukey's HSD pairwise comparison. Initial testing after randomization to groups showed no significant difference in surface roughness (P = 0.24). Two-factor analysis revealed no significant difference between materials (P = 0.34), a significant difference in method of finish (P < or = 0.00), with no significant interaction between type of material and method of finish (P = 0.11). Aluminum oxide disk and impregnated disk systems provided the best finish for microfilled composite and both glass-ionomer materials (P < or = 0.00). No significant difference in method of finish existed with the hybrid composite (P = 0.07). Overall, esthetic restorative material finishing is best accomplished using abrasive impregnated disks or aluminum oxide disks. Finishing burs gave a significantly rougher surface than the former methods.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9610331

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


  7 in total

Review 1.  Review: finishing and polishing procedures of (resin-modified) glass ionomers and compomers in paediatric dentistry.

Authors:  N S Koupis; L A M Marks; R M H Verbeeck; L C Martens
Journal:  Eur Arch Paediatr Dent       Date:  2007-03

2.  Evaluation of the surface roughness in dental ceramics submitted to different finishing and polishing methods.

Authors:  Alex C Vieira; Mario C S Oliveira; Emilena M C X Lima; Isabel Rambob; Mariana Leite
Journal:  J Indian Prosthodont Soc       Date:  2013-03-08

3.  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

4.  Profilometric analysis of two composite resins' surface repolished after tooth brush abrasion with three polishing systems.

Authors:  Mudit Uppal; Arathi Ganesh; Suresh Balagopal; Gurleen Kaur
Journal:  J Conserv Dent       Date:  2013-07

5.  The effect of polishing protocol on surface gloss of different restorative resin composites.

Authors:  Lippo Lassila; Eija Säilynoja; Roosa Prinssi; Pekka K Vallittu; Sufyan Garoushi
Journal:  Biomater Investig Dent       Date:  2020-01-03

6.  Comparative Evaluation of Microleakage of Flowable Composite Resin Using Etch and Rinse, Self-Etch Adhesive Systems, and Self-Adhesive Flowable Composite Resin in Class V Cavities: Confocal Laser Microscopic Study.

Authors:  Ekta Varma Sengar; Sanjyot Mulay; Lotika Beri; Archana Gupta; Thamer Almohareb; Sultan Binalrimal; Ali Robaian; Maha A Bahammam; Hammam Ahmed Bahammam; Sarah Ahmed Bahammam; Bassam Zidane; Nassreen H Albar; Shilpa Bhandi; Deepti Shrivastava; Kumar Chandan Srivastava; Shankargouda Patil
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2022-07-16       Impact factor: 3.748

7.  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

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.