Accuracy of Irradiance and Power of Light-Curing Units Measured With Handheld or Laboratory Grade Radiometers
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2019 |
Outros Autores: | , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Brazilian Dental Journal |
Texto Completo: | http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0103-64402019000400397 |
Resumo: | Abstract This study measured and compared exitance irradiance and power of 4 commercial dental light-curing units (LCU) (Elipar S10, Elipar DeepCure-S, Corded VALO and Bluephase Style) using different types of radiometers. The devices used to analyze the LCU were classified as either handheld analog (Henry Schein, Spring, Demetron 100A, Demetron 100B and Demetron 200), handheld digital (Bluephase 1, Bluephase II, Coltolux, CureRite and Hilux), or laboratory instruments (Thermopile and Integrating Sphere). The laboratory instruments and the Bluephase II radiometer were also used to measure the LCU’s power (mW). The LCU’s were activated for 20 s (n=5). Data were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis and Student-Newman-Keuls multiple comparison test (a=0.05). Among the LCU, the laboratory instruments presented different irradiance values, except for Corded VALO. The Coltolux and Hilux radiometers measured greater irradiance values compared to the laboratory instruments for the four LCUs tested. Within a given LCU, handheld analog units measured lower irradiance values, compared to handheld digital and laboratory instruments, except using the Spring radiometer for the Elipar S10 LCU. None of the handheld radiometers were able to measure similar irradiance values compared to laboratory instruments, except for Elipar S10 when comparing Bluephase 1 and Thermopile. Regarding power measurement, Bluephase II always presented the lowest values compared to the laboratory instruments. These findings suggest that the handheld radiometers utilized by practitioners (analog or digital) exhibit a wide range of irradiance values and may show lower outcomes compared to laboratory based instruments. |
id |
FUNORP-1_7c553c96bd1c81206eb57ce71aa884cc |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:scielo:S0103-64402019000400397 |
network_acronym_str |
FUNORP-1 |
network_name_str |
Brazilian Dental Journal |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Accuracy of Irradiance and Power of Light-Curing Units Measured With Handheld or Laboratory Grade RadiometerspolymerizationLED dental curing lightspowerirradianceAbstract This study measured and compared exitance irradiance and power of 4 commercial dental light-curing units (LCU) (Elipar S10, Elipar DeepCure-S, Corded VALO and Bluephase Style) using different types of radiometers. The devices used to analyze the LCU were classified as either handheld analog (Henry Schein, Spring, Demetron 100A, Demetron 100B and Demetron 200), handheld digital (Bluephase 1, Bluephase II, Coltolux, CureRite and Hilux), or laboratory instruments (Thermopile and Integrating Sphere). The laboratory instruments and the Bluephase II radiometer were also used to measure the LCU’s power (mW). The LCU’s were activated for 20 s (n=5). Data were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis and Student-Newman-Keuls multiple comparison test (a=0.05). Among the LCU, the laboratory instruments presented different irradiance values, except for Corded VALO. The Coltolux and Hilux radiometers measured greater irradiance values compared to the laboratory instruments for the four LCUs tested. Within a given LCU, handheld analog units measured lower irradiance values, compared to handheld digital and laboratory instruments, except using the Spring radiometer for the Elipar S10 LCU. None of the handheld radiometers were able to measure similar irradiance values compared to laboratory instruments, except for Elipar S10 when comparing Bluephase 1 and Thermopile. Regarding power measurement, Bluephase II always presented the lowest values compared to the laboratory instruments. These findings suggest that the handheld radiometers utilized by practitioners (analog or digital) exhibit a wide range of irradiance values and may show lower outcomes compared to laboratory based instruments.Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto2019-07-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0103-64402019000400397Brazilian Dental Journal v.30 n.4 2019reponame:Brazilian Dental Journalinstname:Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto (FUNORP)instacron:FUNORP10.1590/0103-6440201902430info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessGiannini,MarceloAndré,Carolina BossoGobbo,Vanessa CavalliRueggeberg,Frederick Alleneng2019-08-01T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S0103-64402019000400397Revistahttps://www.scielo.br/j/bdj/https://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phpbdj@forp.usp.br||sergio@fosjc.unesp.br1806-47600103-6440opendoar:2019-08-01T00:00Brazilian Dental Journal - Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto (FUNORP)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Accuracy of Irradiance and Power of Light-Curing Units Measured With Handheld or Laboratory Grade Radiometers |
title |
Accuracy of Irradiance and Power of Light-Curing Units Measured With Handheld or Laboratory Grade Radiometers |
spellingShingle |
Accuracy of Irradiance and Power of Light-Curing Units Measured With Handheld or Laboratory Grade Radiometers Giannini,Marcelo polymerization LED dental curing lights power irradiance |
title_short |
Accuracy of Irradiance and Power of Light-Curing Units Measured With Handheld or Laboratory Grade Radiometers |
title_full |
Accuracy of Irradiance and Power of Light-Curing Units Measured With Handheld or Laboratory Grade Radiometers |
title_fullStr |
Accuracy of Irradiance and Power of Light-Curing Units Measured With Handheld or Laboratory Grade Radiometers |
title_full_unstemmed |
Accuracy of Irradiance and Power of Light-Curing Units Measured With Handheld or Laboratory Grade Radiometers |
title_sort |
Accuracy of Irradiance and Power of Light-Curing Units Measured With Handheld or Laboratory Grade Radiometers |
author |
Giannini,Marcelo |
author_facet |
Giannini,Marcelo André,Carolina Bosso Gobbo,Vanessa Cavalli Rueggeberg,Frederick Allen |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
André,Carolina Bosso Gobbo,Vanessa Cavalli Rueggeberg,Frederick Allen |
author2_role |
author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Giannini,Marcelo André,Carolina Bosso Gobbo,Vanessa Cavalli Rueggeberg,Frederick Allen |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
polymerization LED dental curing lights power irradiance |
topic |
polymerization LED dental curing lights power irradiance |
description |
Abstract This study measured and compared exitance irradiance and power of 4 commercial dental light-curing units (LCU) (Elipar S10, Elipar DeepCure-S, Corded VALO and Bluephase Style) using different types of radiometers. The devices used to analyze the LCU were classified as either handheld analog (Henry Schein, Spring, Demetron 100A, Demetron 100B and Demetron 200), handheld digital (Bluephase 1, Bluephase II, Coltolux, CureRite and Hilux), or laboratory instruments (Thermopile and Integrating Sphere). The laboratory instruments and the Bluephase II radiometer were also used to measure the LCU’s power (mW). The LCU’s were activated for 20 s (n=5). Data were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis and Student-Newman-Keuls multiple comparison test (a=0.05). Among the LCU, the laboratory instruments presented different irradiance values, except for Corded VALO. The Coltolux and Hilux radiometers measured greater irradiance values compared to the laboratory instruments for the four LCUs tested. Within a given LCU, handheld analog units measured lower irradiance values, compared to handheld digital and laboratory instruments, except using the Spring radiometer for the Elipar S10 LCU. None of the handheld radiometers were able to measure similar irradiance values compared to laboratory instruments, except for Elipar S10 when comparing Bluephase 1 and Thermopile. Regarding power measurement, Bluephase II always presented the lowest values compared to the laboratory instruments. These findings suggest that the handheld radiometers utilized by practitioners (analog or digital) exhibit a wide range of irradiance values and may show lower outcomes compared to laboratory based instruments. |
publishDate |
2019 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2019-07-01 |
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=S0103-64402019000400397 |
url |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0103-64402019000400397 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
10.1590/0103-6440201902430 |
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 |
Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Brazilian Dental Journal v.30 n.4 2019 reponame:Brazilian Dental Journal instname:Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto (FUNORP) instacron:FUNORP |
instname_str |
Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto (FUNORP) |
instacron_str |
FUNORP |
institution |
FUNORP |
reponame_str |
Brazilian Dental Journal |
collection |
Brazilian Dental Journal |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Brazilian Dental Journal - Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto (FUNORP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
bdj@forp.usp.br||sergio@fosjc.unesp.br |
_version_ |
1754204095704465408 |