Halogen light versus LED for bracket bonding: shear bond strength
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2013 |
Outros Autores: | , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics |
Texto Completo: | http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2176-94512013000100007 |
Resumo: | INTRODUCTION: LED light-curing devices seek to provide a cold light activator which allows protocols of material polymerization with shorter duration. OBJECTIVE: The present study aimed to evaluate the shear bond strength of bracket bonding using three types of light-curing devices: One with halogen light (Optilight Plus - Gnatus) and two with LEDs (Optilight CL - Gnatus and Elipar Freelight - 3M/ESPE). RESULTS: Comparing the results by analysis of variance, the Gnatus LED device showed an inferior statistical behavior in relation to other light sources, when activated by a short time. But, when it was used for 40 seconds, the polymerization results were consistent with the other evaluated sources. The device with the best average performance was the halogen light, followed by the 3M/ESPE LED. CONCLUSION: It was concluded that the LEDs may be indicated in orthodontic practice, as long as a protocol is used for the application of light with the activation time of 40 seconds. |
id |
DPI-1_2f16d814394977a58f9a8724395bbdc2 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:scielo:S2176-94512013000100007 |
network_acronym_str |
DPI-1 |
network_name_str |
Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Halogen light versus LED for bracket bonding: shear bond strengthOrthodonticsShear bond strengthOrthodontic bracketsDental bondingINTRODUCTION: LED light-curing devices seek to provide a cold light activator which allows protocols of material polymerization with shorter duration. OBJECTIVE: The present study aimed to evaluate the shear bond strength of bracket bonding using three types of light-curing devices: One with halogen light (Optilight Plus - Gnatus) and two with LEDs (Optilight CL - Gnatus and Elipar Freelight - 3M/ESPE). RESULTS: Comparing the results by analysis of variance, the Gnatus LED device showed an inferior statistical behavior in relation to other light sources, when activated by a short time. But, when it was used for 40 seconds, the polymerization results were consistent with the other evaluated sources. The device with the best average performance was the halogen light, followed by the 3M/ESPE LED. CONCLUSION: It was concluded that the LEDs may be indicated in orthodontic practice, as long as a protocol is used for the application of light with the activation time of 40 seconds.Dental Press International2013-02-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2176-94512013000100007Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics v.18 n.1 2013reponame:Dental Press Journal of Orthodonticsinstname:Dental Press International (DPI)instacron:DPI10.1590/S2176-94512013000100007info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessCarvalho,Paulo Eduardo GuedesSantos,Valdemir Muzulon dosIsber,HassanCotrim-Ferreira,Flávio Augustoeng2013-05-15T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S2176-94512013000100007Revistahttp://www.scielo.br/dpjoONGhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phpartigos@dentalpress.com.br||davidnormando@hotmail.com2177-67092176-9451opendoar:2013-05-15T00:00Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics - Dental Press International (DPI)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Halogen light versus LED for bracket bonding: shear bond strength |
title |
Halogen light versus LED for bracket bonding: shear bond strength |
spellingShingle |
Halogen light versus LED for bracket bonding: shear bond strength Carvalho,Paulo Eduardo Guedes Orthodontics Shear bond strength Orthodontic brackets Dental bonding |
title_short |
Halogen light versus LED for bracket bonding: shear bond strength |
title_full |
Halogen light versus LED for bracket bonding: shear bond strength |
title_fullStr |
Halogen light versus LED for bracket bonding: shear bond strength |
title_full_unstemmed |
Halogen light versus LED for bracket bonding: shear bond strength |
title_sort |
Halogen light versus LED for bracket bonding: shear bond strength |
author |
Carvalho,Paulo Eduardo Guedes |
author_facet |
Carvalho,Paulo Eduardo Guedes Santos,Valdemir Muzulon dos Isber,Hassan Cotrim-Ferreira,Flávio Augusto |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Santos,Valdemir Muzulon dos Isber,Hassan Cotrim-Ferreira,Flávio Augusto |
author2_role |
author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Carvalho,Paulo Eduardo Guedes Santos,Valdemir Muzulon dos Isber,Hassan Cotrim-Ferreira,Flávio Augusto |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Orthodontics Shear bond strength Orthodontic brackets Dental bonding |
topic |
Orthodontics Shear bond strength Orthodontic brackets Dental bonding |
description |
INTRODUCTION: LED light-curing devices seek to provide a cold light activator which allows protocols of material polymerization with shorter duration. OBJECTIVE: The present study aimed to evaluate the shear bond strength of bracket bonding using three types of light-curing devices: One with halogen light (Optilight Plus - Gnatus) and two with LEDs (Optilight CL - Gnatus and Elipar Freelight - 3M/ESPE). RESULTS: Comparing the results by analysis of variance, the Gnatus LED device showed an inferior statistical behavior in relation to other light sources, when activated by a short time. But, when it was used for 40 seconds, the polymerization results were consistent with the other evaluated sources. The device with the best average performance was the halogen light, followed by the 3M/ESPE LED. CONCLUSION: It was concluded that the LEDs may be indicated in orthodontic practice, as long as a protocol is used for the application of light with the activation time of 40 seconds. |
publishDate |
2013 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2013-02-01 |
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=S2176-94512013000100007 |
url |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2176-94512013000100007 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
10.1590/S2176-94512013000100007 |
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 |
Dental Press International |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Dental Press International |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics v.18 n.1 2013 reponame:Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics instname:Dental Press International (DPI) instacron:DPI |
instname_str |
Dental Press International (DPI) |
instacron_str |
DPI |
institution |
DPI |
reponame_str |
Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics |
collection |
Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics - Dental Press International (DPI) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
artigos@dentalpress.com.br||davidnormando@hotmail.com |
_version_ |
1754122396361555968 |