Effect of finishing and polishing methods on surface roughness of autopolymerized acrylic resins
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Publication Date: | 2017 |
Other Authors: | , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | eng |
Source: | RGO - Revista Gaúcha de Odontologia (Online) |
Download full: | http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1981-86372017000400303 |
Summary: | ABSTRACT Objective : To evaluate the surface roughness of two makes of autopolymerized acrylic resin (Classic Dencor® and Duralay®) with two different methods of finishing and polishing (conventional and using the Dhpro® finishing & polishing kit). Methods : A total of 20 specimens (10 of each make) was obtained using Zetalabor®--Zhermak condensation silicone molds. After polymerization, 20 blocks of resin were divided in two and subjected to two types of finishing and polishing, one at each end. The types of finishing and polishing were as follows: conventional (lathe) and using the Dhpro® finishing & polishing kit. Once finished and polished, the specimens were subjected to surface roughness testing using a roughness meter and were analyzed via the Student’s t-test. Results : There is a statistically significant difference between the forms of polishing, unrelated to the brand of acrylic resin. Conventional polishing achieved a level of 0.12 µm for both resins and the DhPro® polishing presented roughness a little above 0.2 µm. Conclusion : Conventional polishing is superior to the DhPro® kit, as it achieves lower levels of roughness. There is no significant difference between the acrylic resins in terms of surface roughness after the finishing and polishing processes. |
id |
FSLM-1_87da530b554be9ac1751477352855797 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:scielo:S1981-86372017000400303 |
network_acronym_str |
FSLM-1 |
network_name_str |
RGO - Revista Gaúcha de Odontologia (Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Effect of finishing and polishing methods on surface roughness of autopolymerized acrylic resinsAcrylic resinsDental polishingEsthetics, dentalABSTRACT Objective : To evaluate the surface roughness of two makes of autopolymerized acrylic resin (Classic Dencor® and Duralay®) with two different methods of finishing and polishing (conventional and using the Dhpro® finishing & polishing kit). Methods : A total of 20 specimens (10 of each make) was obtained using Zetalabor®--Zhermak condensation silicone molds. After polymerization, 20 blocks of resin were divided in two and subjected to two types of finishing and polishing, one at each end. The types of finishing and polishing were as follows: conventional (lathe) and using the Dhpro® finishing & polishing kit. Once finished and polished, the specimens were subjected to surface roughness testing using a roughness meter and were analyzed via the Student’s t-test. Results : There is a statistically significant difference between the forms of polishing, unrelated to the brand of acrylic resin. Conventional polishing achieved a level of 0.12 µm for both resins and the DhPro® polishing presented roughness a little above 0.2 µm. Conclusion : Conventional polishing is superior to the DhPro® kit, as it achieves lower levels of roughness. There is no significant difference between the acrylic resins in terms of surface roughness after the finishing and polishing processes.Faculdade São Leopoldo Mandic2017-12-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1981-86372017000400303RGO - Revista Gaúcha de Odontologia v.65 n.4 2017reponame:RGO - Revista Gaúcha de Odontologia (Online)instname:Faculdade São Leopoldo Mandic (FSLM)instacron:FSLM10.1590/1981-86372017000200003241info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessDUARTE,Gabriel Lúcio CalazansMENDONÇA,Angélica Kercya Pereira deFREITAS,Ana Roberta Assunção deDUARTE,Antônio Ricardo CalazansHOLANDA,Julita de Campos Pipoloeng2019-08-06T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S1981-86372017000400303Revistahttp://revodonto.bvsalud.org/scielo.php?script=sci_serial&pid=1981-8637&lng=pt&nrm=isohttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||contato@revistargo.com.br1981-86370103-6971opendoar:2019-08-06T00:00RGO - Revista Gaúcha de Odontologia (Online) - Faculdade São Leopoldo Mandic (FSLM)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Effect of finishing and polishing methods on surface roughness of autopolymerized acrylic resins |
title |
Effect of finishing and polishing methods on surface roughness of autopolymerized acrylic resins |
spellingShingle |
Effect of finishing and polishing methods on surface roughness of autopolymerized acrylic resins DUARTE,Gabriel Lúcio Calazans Acrylic resins Dental polishing Esthetics, dental |
title_short |
Effect of finishing and polishing methods on surface roughness of autopolymerized acrylic resins |
title_full |
Effect of finishing and polishing methods on surface roughness of autopolymerized acrylic resins |
title_fullStr |
Effect of finishing and polishing methods on surface roughness of autopolymerized acrylic resins |
title_full_unstemmed |
Effect of finishing and polishing methods on surface roughness of autopolymerized acrylic resins |
title_sort |
Effect of finishing and polishing methods on surface roughness of autopolymerized acrylic resins |
author |
DUARTE,Gabriel Lúcio Calazans |
author_facet |
DUARTE,Gabriel Lúcio Calazans MENDONÇA,Angélica Kercya Pereira de FREITAS,Ana Roberta Assunção de DUARTE,Antônio Ricardo Calazans HOLANDA,Julita de Campos Pipolo |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
MENDONÇA,Angélica Kercya Pereira de FREITAS,Ana Roberta Assunção de DUARTE,Antônio Ricardo Calazans HOLANDA,Julita de Campos Pipolo |
author2_role |
author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
DUARTE,Gabriel Lúcio Calazans MENDONÇA,Angélica Kercya Pereira de FREITAS,Ana Roberta Assunção de DUARTE,Antônio Ricardo Calazans HOLANDA,Julita de Campos Pipolo |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Acrylic resins Dental polishing Esthetics, dental |
topic |
Acrylic resins Dental polishing Esthetics, dental |
description |
ABSTRACT Objective : To evaluate the surface roughness of two makes of autopolymerized acrylic resin (Classic Dencor® and Duralay®) with two different methods of finishing and polishing (conventional and using the Dhpro® finishing & polishing kit). Methods : A total of 20 specimens (10 of each make) was obtained using Zetalabor®--Zhermak condensation silicone molds. After polymerization, 20 blocks of resin were divided in two and subjected to two types of finishing and polishing, one at each end. The types of finishing and polishing were as follows: conventional (lathe) and using the Dhpro® finishing & polishing kit. Once finished and polished, the specimens were subjected to surface roughness testing using a roughness meter and were analyzed via the Student’s t-test. Results : There is a statistically significant difference between the forms of polishing, unrelated to the brand of acrylic resin. Conventional polishing achieved a level of 0.12 µm for both resins and the DhPro® polishing presented roughness a little above 0.2 µm. Conclusion : Conventional polishing is superior to the DhPro® kit, as it achieves lower levels of roughness. There is no significant difference between the acrylic resins in terms of surface roughness after the finishing and polishing processes. |
publishDate |
2017 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2017-12-01 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1981-86372017000400303 |
url |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1981-86372017000400303 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
10.1590/1981-86372017000200003241 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
text/html |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Faculdade São Leopoldo Mandic |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Faculdade São Leopoldo Mandic |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
RGO - Revista Gaúcha de Odontologia v.65 n.4 2017 reponame:RGO - Revista Gaúcha de Odontologia (Online) instname:Faculdade São Leopoldo Mandic (FSLM) instacron:FSLM |
instname_str |
Faculdade São Leopoldo Mandic (FSLM) |
instacron_str |
FSLM |
institution |
FSLM |
reponame_str |
RGO - Revista Gaúcha de Odontologia (Online) |
collection |
RGO - Revista Gaúcha de Odontologia (Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
RGO - Revista Gaúcha de Odontologia (Online) - Faculdade São Leopoldo Mandic (FSLM) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
||contato@revistargo.com.br |
_version_ |
1754204121954516992 |