Influence of the polishing technique on the roughness and profile of bisacryl- based materials

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Garrido, Lorena de Mello Alcântara
Data de Publicação: 2017
Tipo de documento: Dissertação
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da USP
Texto Completo: https://www.teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/25/25148/tde-09122021-105400/
Resumo: Statement of the problem. The choice of technique and material for making provisional restorations is important. The material must have enough strength to withstand the masticatory loads without suffering deformation or fracture and its surface must have good finishing and polishing to reduce biofilm accumulation. Objective. The aim of this study was to investigate what is the best polishing protocol for different bis-acryl materials with the intention to obtain a smooth surface. Materials and methods. A total of 104 samples were made (15mm long x 5mm wide x 4mm high) and were divided into three study factors: material (Protemp 4, Structur 3, Dencor, Z350XT), polishing (Sof-Lex Pop On and Sof-Lex Spiral discs) and period (initial, postpolishing, post-brushing). Thirteen samples were made per material group, and at each step, a sample was randomly taken for the purpose of submitting to scanning electron microscopy (SEM) analysis, totaling 24 samples to be submitted to this test, and thus, resulting in 80 samples to be brushed, and 10 samples per group for statistical analysis (n = 10). In all samples, surface roughness readings (m) were performed at all periods, that is, after they were made, after polishing and after brushing through the rugosimeter (Hommel tester). At the end, the 80 samples were read in a profilometer for analysis of surface wear. The results for the roughness were submitted to ANOVA for three criteria followed by the Tukey`s test ( = 0.05), and for the surface wear test, the results were submitted to ANOVA for two criteria followed by the Tukey`s test ( = 0.05). Results. Protemp 4 bis-acryl showed higher values of surface roughness when polished with Sof-Lex Spiral discs (0.284 m) when compared to Sof-Lex Pop On discs polishing (0.075 m). After brushing, there was an increase of surface roughness for both types of polishing. Sof-Lex Spiral discs (0.375 m) and Sof-Lex Pop On discs (0.359 m), but with no significant differences (p>0.05). For the surface wear results, there was no statistical difference between the groups: Protemp 4 bis-acryl resin with Sof-Lex Pop On polishing (13.95 m) and polishing with the Sof-Lex Spiral discs (14.91 m ) and the Z350XT composite resin group polished with the two polishing systems - Sof-Lex Pop On and Sof-Lex Spiral (12.61m, 12.70m, respectively). Structur 3 bis-acryl resin showed lower surface roughness results when polished with Sof-Lex Pop On discs (0.113 m) compared to Sof-Lex Spiral discs (0.223 m). For the surface wear results, there was no difference between the groups of the Structur 3 bis-acryl resin, but the values for both the polished group with Sof-Lex Pop On discs (15.77m) and the group polished with the Sof-Lex discs Spiral (15.40 m) were very close to the values of the group of the Protemp 4 bis-acryl resin and the Z350XT composite resin group, with statistical difference. The two tested bis-acryl resins, the Protemp 4 and Structur 3 in the two polishing systems, showed better surface roughness values (Ra) and lower surface wear values than the Dencor acrylic resin. Dencor acrylic resin group showed the highest values of surface roughness at all times. However, after polishing and brushing, the surface roughness presented lower values, when compared to Ra initial values, but this material showed the highest surface wear values (31.21 m).The resin composite group Z350XT which polishing procedure was Sof-Lex Pop On discs showed lower values (0.039 m). There were no statistically significant differences in surface roughness at all periods and the surface roughness increased after brushing, followed by lower values also for surface wear (12.61 m). Conclusion. By polishing it is possible to improve the surface roughness of the resinous materials, however, the technique, the operator, the materials to be polished and the finishing and polishing system are directly correlated. For the present study, the system that obtained the best results was the Sof-Lex Pop On discs, and the bis-acryl resin that presented the lowest Ra number was the Structur 3 bis-acryl resin. For surface wear, the Structur 3 bis-acryl resin showed higher values compared to the results of the Protemp 4 bis-acryl resin group, which, in turn, showed surface wear values close to that of the Z350 XT composite resin group.
id USP_7913f36d1994b7fd9934976a226a97b6
oai_identifier_str oai:teses.usp.br:tde-09122021-105400
network_acronym_str USP
network_name_str Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da USP
repository_id_str 2721
spelling Influence of the polishing technique on the roughness and profile of bisacryl- based materialsInfluência da técnica do polimento na rugosidade superficial e perfilometria de materiais à base de resina bisacrílicaAcrylic resinBis-acrylBisacrílicaBrushingEscovaçãoPolimentoPolishingResin CompositeResina acrílicaResina compostaRoughnessRugosidadeStatement of the problem. The choice of technique and material for making provisional restorations is important. The material must have enough strength to withstand the masticatory loads without suffering deformation or fracture and its surface must have good finishing and polishing to reduce biofilm accumulation. Objective. The aim of this study was to investigate what is the best polishing protocol for different bis-acryl materials with the intention to obtain a smooth surface. Materials and methods. A total of 104 samples were made (15mm long x 5mm wide x 4mm high) and were divided into three study factors: material (Protemp 4, Structur 3, Dencor, Z350XT), polishing (Sof-Lex Pop On and Sof-Lex Spiral discs) and period (initial, postpolishing, post-brushing). Thirteen samples were made per material group, and at each step, a sample was randomly taken for the purpose of submitting to scanning electron microscopy (SEM) analysis, totaling 24 samples to be submitted to this test, and thus, resulting in 80 samples to be brushed, and 10 samples per group for statistical analysis (n = 10). In all samples, surface roughness readings (m) were performed at all periods, that is, after they were made, after polishing and after brushing through the rugosimeter (Hommel tester). At the end, the 80 samples were read in a profilometer for analysis of surface wear. The results for the roughness were submitted to ANOVA for three criteria followed by the Tukey`s test ( = 0.05), and for the surface wear test, the results were submitted to ANOVA for two criteria followed by the Tukey`s test ( = 0.05). Results. Protemp 4 bis-acryl showed higher values of surface roughness when polished with Sof-Lex Spiral discs (0.284 m) when compared to Sof-Lex Pop On discs polishing (0.075 m). After brushing, there was an increase of surface roughness for both types of polishing. Sof-Lex Spiral discs (0.375 m) and Sof-Lex Pop On discs (0.359 m), but with no significant differences (p>0.05). For the surface wear results, there was no statistical difference between the groups: Protemp 4 bis-acryl resin with Sof-Lex Pop On polishing (13.95 m) and polishing with the Sof-Lex Spiral discs (14.91 m ) and the Z350XT composite resin group polished with the two polishing systems - Sof-Lex Pop On and Sof-Lex Spiral (12.61m, 12.70m, respectively). Structur 3 bis-acryl resin showed lower surface roughness results when polished with Sof-Lex Pop On discs (0.113 m) compared to Sof-Lex Spiral discs (0.223 m). For the surface wear results, there was no difference between the groups of the Structur 3 bis-acryl resin, but the values for both the polished group with Sof-Lex Pop On discs (15.77m) and the group polished with the Sof-Lex discs Spiral (15.40 m) were very close to the values of the group of the Protemp 4 bis-acryl resin and the Z350XT composite resin group, with statistical difference. The two tested bis-acryl resins, the Protemp 4 and Structur 3 in the two polishing systems, showed better surface roughness values (Ra) and lower surface wear values than the Dencor acrylic resin. Dencor acrylic resin group showed the highest values of surface roughness at all times. However, after polishing and brushing, the surface roughness presented lower values, when compared to Ra initial values, but this material showed the highest surface wear values (31.21 m).The resin composite group Z350XT which polishing procedure was Sof-Lex Pop On discs showed lower values (0.039 m). There were no statistically significant differences in surface roughness at all periods and the surface roughness increased after brushing, followed by lower values also for surface wear (12.61 m). Conclusion. By polishing it is possible to improve the surface roughness of the resinous materials, however, the technique, the operator, the materials to be polished and the finishing and polishing system are directly correlated. For the present study, the system that obtained the best results was the Sof-Lex Pop On discs, and the bis-acryl resin that presented the lowest Ra number was the Structur 3 bis-acryl resin. For surface wear, the Structur 3 bis-acryl resin showed higher values compared to the results of the Protemp 4 bis-acryl resin group, which, in turn, showed surface wear values close to that of the Z350 XT composite resin group.Problematização. É de grande importância a escolha da técnica e do material a serem utilizados para a confecção das restaurações provisórias. O material deve apresentar espessura suficiente e resistência para suportar as cargas mastigatórias sem sofrer deformação ou fratura, bem como, sua superfície deve apresentar um bom acabamento e polimento, reduzindo assim o acúmulo de biofilme, facilitando a higienização pelo paciente. Objetivo. Investigar qual o melhor protocolo de polimento para as diferentes resinas bisacrílicas com a intenção de obter uma superfície lisa. Material e métodos. Um total de 104 amostras foram confeccionadas (15mm de comp. x 5mm de largura x 4mm de altura) e foram divididos em três fatores de estudo: material (Protemp 4, Structur 3, Dencor, Z350XT), polimento (discos Sof-Lex Pop On e Sof-Lex Spiral) e período (inicial, pós polimento, pós escovação). Foram confeccionadas 13 amostras por grupo de material, sendo que em cada etapa foi retirado uma amostra aleatoriamente com a finalidade de submeter à análise de microscopia eletrônica de varredura (MEV), totalizando 24 amostras para serem submetidas a este teste, e assim, resultando em 80 amostras para serem escovadas, e em 10 amostras por grupo para análise estatística (n=10). Em todas as amostras foram realizadas leituras (m) da rugosidade de superfície (Ra) em todos os períodos, ou seja, logo após serem confeccionadas, após o polimento e após escovação, através do rugosímetro (Hommel tester). Ao final, as 80 amostras foram submetidas a leitura no perfilômetro, para análise do desgaste superficial. Os resultados para a rugosidade foram submetidos a ANOVA a três critérios seguido pelo teste de Tukey ( = 0,05). E para o desgaste superficial os resultados foram submetidos a ANOVA a dois critérios seguido pelo teste de Tukey ( = 0,05). Resultados. A resina bisacrílica Protemp 4 mostrou maiores valores de rugosidade superficial (Ra) quando polidos com os discos Sof-Lex Spiral (0,284 m), quando comparado ao polimento com discos Sof-Lex Pop On (0,075 m), após a escovação houve aumento da rugosidade superficial para ambos os tipos de polimentos, tanto os discos Sof-Lex Spiral (0,375 m) quanto para o polimento com os discos Sof-Lex Pop On (0,359 m), mas não houve diferença estatística significativa (p>0,05). Para os resultados de desgaste superficial, não houve diferença estatística entre os grupos: da resina bisacrílica Protemp 4 com polimento Sof-Lex Pop On (13,95 m), e com o polimento com os discos Sof-Lex Spiral (14,91m) e o grupo da resina composta Z350XT polidos com os dois sistemas de polimento Sof-Lex Pop On e Sof- Lex Spiral (12,61m, 12,70 m respectivamente). A resina bisacrílica Structur 3 mostrou menores valores de rugosidade de superfície quando polidos com os discos Sof-Lex Pop On (0,113 m) em comparação ao polimento com os discos Sof-Lex Spiral (0,223 m). Para os resultados de desgaste superficial, não houve diferença entre os grupos da resina bisacrílica Structur 3, porem os valores tanto para o grupo polido com os discos Sof-Lex Pop On (15,77 m) e o grupo polido com os discos Sof-Lex Spiral (15,40 m) foram bem próximos aos valores do grupo da resina bisacrílica Protemp 4 e ao grupo da resina composta Z350XT, com diferença estatística. As duas resinas bisacrílicas testadas, a Protemp 4 e a Structur 3 nos dois sistemas de polimentos mostraram melhores valores de rugosidade superficial (Ra) e menores valores de desgaste superficial que a resina acrílica Dencor. Conclusão. Através do polimento é possível melhorar a rugosidade superficial dos materiais resinosos, entretanto, a técnica, o operador, os materiais a serem polidos e o sistema de acabamento e polimento estão diretamente correlacionados. Para este estudo, o sistema que obteve os melhores resultados foi o dos discos Sof-Lex Pop On, e a resina bisacrílica que apresentou o menor número de Ra foi a resina bisacrílica Structur 3. Para o desgaste superficial a resina bisacrílica Structur 3 mostrou valores maiores comparados aos resultados do grupo da resina bisacrílica Protemp 4, esta, por sua vez, mostrou valores de desgaste superficial próximos ao do grupo da resina composta Z350 XT.Biblioteca Digitais de Teses e Dissertações da USPFuruse, Adilson YoshioGarrido, Lorena de Mello Alcântara2017-06-12info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/masterThesisapplication/pdfhttps://www.teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/25/25148/tde-09122021-105400/reponame:Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da USPinstname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP)instacron:USPLiberar o conteúdo para acesso público.info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesseng2021-12-09T20:09:26Zoai:teses.usp.br:tde-09122021-105400Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertaçõeshttp://www.teses.usp.br/PUBhttp://www.teses.usp.br/cgi-bin/mtd2br.plvirginia@if.usp.br|| atendimento@aguia.usp.br||virginia@if.usp.bropendoar:27212021-12-09T20:09:26Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da USP - Universidade de São Paulo (USP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Influence of the polishing technique on the roughness and profile of bisacryl- based materials
Influência da técnica do polimento na rugosidade superficial e perfilometria de materiais à base de resina bisacrílica
title Influence of the polishing technique on the roughness and profile of bisacryl- based materials
spellingShingle Influence of the polishing technique on the roughness and profile of bisacryl- based materials
Garrido, Lorena de Mello Alcântara
Acrylic resin
Bis-acryl
Bisacrílica
Brushing
Escovação
Polimento
Polishing
Resin Composite
Resina acrílica
Resina composta
Roughness
Rugosidade
title_short Influence of the polishing technique on the roughness and profile of bisacryl- based materials
title_full Influence of the polishing technique on the roughness and profile of bisacryl- based materials
title_fullStr Influence of the polishing technique on the roughness and profile of bisacryl- based materials
title_full_unstemmed Influence of the polishing technique on the roughness and profile of bisacryl- based materials
title_sort Influence of the polishing technique on the roughness and profile of bisacryl- based materials
author Garrido, Lorena de Mello Alcântara
author_facet Garrido, Lorena de Mello Alcântara
author_role author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv Furuse, Adilson Yoshio
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Garrido, Lorena de Mello Alcântara
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Acrylic resin
Bis-acryl
Bisacrílica
Brushing
Escovação
Polimento
Polishing
Resin Composite
Resina acrílica
Resina composta
Roughness
Rugosidade
topic Acrylic resin
Bis-acryl
Bisacrílica
Brushing
Escovação
Polimento
Polishing
Resin Composite
Resina acrílica
Resina composta
Roughness
Rugosidade
description Statement of the problem. The choice of technique and material for making provisional restorations is important. The material must have enough strength to withstand the masticatory loads without suffering deformation or fracture and its surface must have good finishing and polishing to reduce biofilm accumulation. Objective. The aim of this study was to investigate what is the best polishing protocol for different bis-acryl materials with the intention to obtain a smooth surface. Materials and methods. A total of 104 samples were made (15mm long x 5mm wide x 4mm high) and were divided into three study factors: material (Protemp 4, Structur 3, Dencor, Z350XT), polishing (Sof-Lex Pop On and Sof-Lex Spiral discs) and period (initial, postpolishing, post-brushing). Thirteen samples were made per material group, and at each step, a sample was randomly taken for the purpose of submitting to scanning electron microscopy (SEM) analysis, totaling 24 samples to be submitted to this test, and thus, resulting in 80 samples to be brushed, and 10 samples per group for statistical analysis (n = 10). In all samples, surface roughness readings (m) were performed at all periods, that is, after they were made, after polishing and after brushing through the rugosimeter (Hommel tester). At the end, the 80 samples were read in a profilometer for analysis of surface wear. The results for the roughness were submitted to ANOVA for three criteria followed by the Tukey`s test ( = 0.05), and for the surface wear test, the results were submitted to ANOVA for two criteria followed by the Tukey`s test ( = 0.05). Results. Protemp 4 bis-acryl showed higher values of surface roughness when polished with Sof-Lex Spiral discs (0.284 m) when compared to Sof-Lex Pop On discs polishing (0.075 m). After brushing, there was an increase of surface roughness for both types of polishing. Sof-Lex Spiral discs (0.375 m) and Sof-Lex Pop On discs (0.359 m), but with no significant differences (p>0.05). For the surface wear results, there was no statistical difference between the groups: Protemp 4 bis-acryl resin with Sof-Lex Pop On polishing (13.95 m) and polishing with the Sof-Lex Spiral discs (14.91 m ) and the Z350XT composite resin group polished with the two polishing systems - Sof-Lex Pop On and Sof-Lex Spiral (12.61m, 12.70m, respectively). Structur 3 bis-acryl resin showed lower surface roughness results when polished with Sof-Lex Pop On discs (0.113 m) compared to Sof-Lex Spiral discs (0.223 m). For the surface wear results, there was no difference between the groups of the Structur 3 bis-acryl resin, but the values for both the polished group with Sof-Lex Pop On discs (15.77m) and the group polished with the Sof-Lex discs Spiral (15.40 m) were very close to the values of the group of the Protemp 4 bis-acryl resin and the Z350XT composite resin group, with statistical difference. The two tested bis-acryl resins, the Protemp 4 and Structur 3 in the two polishing systems, showed better surface roughness values (Ra) and lower surface wear values than the Dencor acrylic resin. Dencor acrylic resin group showed the highest values of surface roughness at all times. However, after polishing and brushing, the surface roughness presented lower values, when compared to Ra initial values, but this material showed the highest surface wear values (31.21 m).The resin composite group Z350XT which polishing procedure was Sof-Lex Pop On discs showed lower values (0.039 m). There were no statistically significant differences in surface roughness at all periods and the surface roughness increased after brushing, followed by lower values also for surface wear (12.61 m). Conclusion. By polishing it is possible to improve the surface roughness of the resinous materials, however, the technique, the operator, the materials to be polished and the finishing and polishing system are directly correlated. For the present study, the system that obtained the best results was the Sof-Lex Pop On discs, and the bis-acryl resin that presented the lowest Ra number was the Structur 3 bis-acryl resin. For surface wear, the Structur 3 bis-acryl resin showed higher values compared to the results of the Protemp 4 bis-acryl resin group, which, in turn, showed surface wear values close to that of the Z350 XT composite resin group.
publishDate 2017
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2017-06-12
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/masterThesis
format masterThesis
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://www.teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/25/25148/tde-09122021-105400/
url https://www.teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/25/25148/tde-09122021-105400/
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Liberar o conteúdo para acesso público.
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Liberar o conteúdo para acesso público.
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.coverage.none.fl_str_mv
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Biblioteca Digitais de Teses e Dissertações da USP
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Biblioteca Digitais de Teses e Dissertações da USP
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv
reponame:Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da USP
instname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
instacron:USP
instname_str Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
instacron_str USP
institution USP
reponame_str Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da USP
collection Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da USP
repository.name.fl_str_mv Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da USP - Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv virginia@if.usp.br|| atendimento@aguia.usp.br||virginia@if.usp.br
_version_ 1815256849285382144