Composite surfaces after finishing and polishing techniques
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2000 |
Outros Autores: | , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
Texto Completo: | http://hdl.handle.net/11449/219238 |
Resumo: | Purpose: To evaluate the effect of finishing and polishing techniques on surface roughness of resin-based composites (RBCs). Materials and Methods: Forty specimens of each material were cured under Mylar strips and immersed in artificial saliva for 1 wk. Samples were tested with a profilometer to obtain baseline average surface roughness (Ra). Specimens of both RBCs were then finished and polished according to four techniques: (1) Sof-Lex disks; (2) Sof-Lex disks followed by Prisma Gloss; (3) Enhance points; (4) Enhance points followed by Prisma Gloss application. New readings of the roughness pattern were carried out and the difference of post-polishing and baseline values were analyzed. Results: ANOVA test (α= 0.05) did not show differences between materials (P= 0.9393) nor interaction effects (P= 0.3094), but significant difference among the finishing/polishing techniques were detected (P= 0.0157). Tukey's test showed that the smoothest surface was obtained when the specimens were treated by Sof-Lex followed by Prosma Gloss polishing paste; and the worst results were obtained after using Enhance points alone. |
id |
UNSP_e021c78b3ff98e81c1b80e02b0300eee |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/219238 |
network_acronym_str |
UNSP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
repository_id_str |
2946 |
spelling |
Composite surfaces after finishing and polishing techniquesPurpose: To evaluate the effect of finishing and polishing techniques on surface roughness of resin-based composites (RBCs). Materials and Methods: Forty specimens of each material were cured under Mylar strips and immersed in artificial saliva for 1 wk. Samples were tested with a profilometer to obtain baseline average surface roughness (Ra). Specimens of both RBCs were then finished and polished according to four techniques: (1) Sof-Lex disks; (2) Sof-Lex disks followed by Prisma Gloss; (3) Enhance points; (4) Enhance points followed by Prisma Gloss application. New readings of the roughness pattern were carried out and the difference of post-polishing and baseline values were analyzed. Results: ANOVA test (α= 0.05) did not show differences between materials (P= 0.9393) nor interaction effects (P= 0.3094), but significant difference among the finishing/polishing techniques were detected (P= 0.0157). Tukey's test showed that the smoothest surface was obtained when the specimens were treated by Sof-Lex followed by Prosma Gloss polishing paste; and the worst results were obtained after using Enhance points alone.Discipline Biostatist. Sci. M. Araraquara School of Dentistry UNESP, Araraquara, Säo PauloDiscipline Biostatist. Sci. M. Araraquara School of Dentistry UNESP, Araraquara, Säo PauloUniversidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)Turssi, Cecilia P.Saad, Jose R. C.Duarte Jr, Sillas L. L.Rodrigues Jr., Antonio L. [UNESP]2022-04-28T18:54:31Z2022-04-28T18:54:31Z2000-06-01info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/article136-138American Journal of Dentistry, v. 13, n. 3, p. 136-138, 2000.0894-8275http://hdl.handle.net/11449/2192382-s2.0-0034209290Scopusreponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESPinstname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)instacron:UNESPengAmerican Journal of Dentistryinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2022-04-28T18:54:31Zoai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/219238Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://repositorio.unesp.br/oai/requestopendoar:29462024-08-05T21:06:44.456004Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Composite surfaces after finishing and polishing techniques |
title |
Composite surfaces after finishing and polishing techniques |
spellingShingle |
Composite surfaces after finishing and polishing techniques Turssi, Cecilia P. |
title_short |
Composite surfaces after finishing and polishing techniques |
title_full |
Composite surfaces after finishing and polishing techniques |
title_fullStr |
Composite surfaces after finishing and polishing techniques |
title_full_unstemmed |
Composite surfaces after finishing and polishing techniques |
title_sort |
Composite surfaces after finishing and polishing techniques |
author |
Turssi, Cecilia P. |
author_facet |
Turssi, Cecilia P. Saad, Jose R. C. Duarte Jr, Sillas L. L. Rodrigues Jr., Antonio L. [UNESP] |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Saad, Jose R. C. Duarte Jr, Sillas L. L. Rodrigues Jr., Antonio L. [UNESP] |
author2_role |
author author author |
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Turssi, Cecilia P. Saad, Jose R. C. Duarte Jr, Sillas L. L. Rodrigues Jr., Antonio L. [UNESP] |
description |
Purpose: To evaluate the effect of finishing and polishing techniques on surface roughness of resin-based composites (RBCs). Materials and Methods: Forty specimens of each material were cured under Mylar strips and immersed in artificial saliva for 1 wk. Samples were tested with a profilometer to obtain baseline average surface roughness (Ra). Specimens of both RBCs were then finished and polished according to four techniques: (1) Sof-Lex disks; (2) Sof-Lex disks followed by Prisma Gloss; (3) Enhance points; (4) Enhance points followed by Prisma Gloss application. New readings of the roughness pattern were carried out and the difference of post-polishing and baseline values were analyzed. Results: ANOVA test (α= 0.05) did not show differences between materials (P= 0.9393) nor interaction effects (P= 0.3094), but significant difference among the finishing/polishing techniques were detected (P= 0.0157). Tukey's test showed that the smoothest surface was obtained when the specimens were treated by Sof-Lex followed by Prosma Gloss polishing paste; and the worst results were obtained after using Enhance points alone. |
publishDate |
2000 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2000-06-01 2022-04-28T18:54:31Z 2022-04-28T18:54:31Z |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
American Journal of Dentistry, v. 13, n. 3, p. 136-138, 2000. 0894-8275 http://hdl.handle.net/11449/219238 2-s2.0-0034209290 |
identifier_str_mv |
American Journal of Dentistry, v. 13, n. 3, p. 136-138, 2000. 0894-8275 2-s2.0-0034209290 |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/11449/219238 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
American Journal of Dentistry |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
136-138 |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Scopus reponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESP instname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) instacron:UNESP |
instname_str |
Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) |
instacron_str |
UNESP |
institution |
UNESP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
collection |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1808129285998772224 |