Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://scholarbank.nus.edu.sg/handle/10635/46972
Title: Surface texture of resin-modified glass ionomer cements: Effects of finishing/polishing systems
Authors: Yap, A.U.J. 
Tan, W.S.
Yeo, J.C.
Yap, W.Y.
Ong, S.B.
Issue Date: 2002
Source: Yap, A.U.J.,Tan, W.S.,Yeo, J.C.,Yap, W.Y.,Ong, S.B. (2002). Surface texture of resin-modified glass ionomer cements: Effects of finishing/polishing systems. Operative Dentistry 27 (4) : 381-386. ScholarBank@NUS Repository.
Abstract: This study investigated the surface texture of two resin-modified glass ionomer cements (RMGICs) in the vertical and horizontal axis after treatment with different finishing/polishing systems. Class V preparations were made on the buccal and lingual/palatal surfaces of freshly extracted teeth. The cavities on each tooth were restored with Fuji II LC (GC) and Photac-Fil Quick (ESPE) according to manufacturers' instructions. Immediately after light- polymerization, gross finishing was done with 8-flute tungsten carbide burs. The teeth were then randomly divided into four groups and finished/polished with (a) Robot Carbides (RC); (b) Super-Snap system (SS); (c) OneGloss (OG) and (d) CompoSite Points (CS). The sample size for each material-finishing/polishing system combination was eight. The mean surface roughness (μm) in vertical (RaV) and horizontal (RaH) axis was measured using a profilometer. Data was subjected to ANOVA/Scheffe's tests and Independent Samples t-test at significance level 0.05. Mean RaV ranged from 0.59-1.31 and 0.83-1.52, while mean RaH ranged from 0.80-1.43 and 0.85-1.58 for Fuji II LC and Photac-Fil, respectively. Results of statistical analysis were as follows: Fuji II LC: RaV-RC, SS<OG & SS<CS; RaH-SS, CS<RC, OG; Photac-Fil: RaV- SS, CS<OG; RaH-SS<RC, OG & CS<RC (where < indicates significantly greater Ra values). Significant differences in RaV and RaH values were observed when Fuji II LC was finished with RC. The use of carbides (RC) and one-step rubber abrasive system (OG) for finishing/polishing of RMGICs is not recommended. Graded abrasive disk (SS) or two-step rubber abrasive (CS) systems should be used instead. ©Operative Dentistry, 2002.
Source Title: Operative Dentistry
URI: http://scholarbank.nus.edu.sg/handle/10635/46972
ISSN: 03617734
Appears in Collections:Staff Publications

Show full item record
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.

Page view(s)

38
checked on Dec 8, 2017

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.