ABSTRACT
Accurate diagnosis and proper treatment planning should be established before making any prosthetic rehabilitation to restore the good appearance of the tooth, a better smile, phonetics, and to achieve perfect occlusion/mastication. We wanted to evaluate the changes of surface treatment protocols on the tensile bonding strength between enamel and ceramic restorations (lithium disilicate).METHODSA total of 20 freshly extracted, non-carious teeth were stored in normal saline solution at 25°C until used. Clean enamel surfaces 2 mm X 2 mm were obtained from the extracted teeth by using wheel diamond bur. Each enamel side received one E-max sprue, so four sprues of different surface treatment protocols per tooth (G1 TS: Etching, bonding, and curing. CS: Etching, monobond, curing, overall light cure) (G2 TS: Bonding, curing, self-etch / self-adhesive resin cement, overall light cure. CS: Monobond etch and prime) (G3 TS: Etching, bonding without curing. CS: Etching, monobond, curing, overall light cure) (G4 TS: Etching, bonding, curing. CS: Etching, monobond, bonding, curing, light-cure resin cement, overall light cure). Tensile bonding strength was measured using the Instron testing machine. One-way ANOVA test was used to analyse the data.RESULTSThe highest mean was observed in Group 3 (124.34±43.47) followed by Group 1 (104.29±50.09), which is control group. In contrast, the lowest mean was observed in Group 2 (83.64 ± 53.56) and Group 4 (94.14±57.91). The results of ANOVA test have shown a significant difference between the surface treatment groups at 5% significance level.CONCLUSIONSHydrofluoric acid and primer/silane coupling agent create a porous surface on the ceramic that allow a good interaction with silane coupling agent.
ABSTRACT
Objective: In the healthcare setting, periodontal disease is among common dental disease resulting in tooth loss. Given its increasedprevalence, the study determines the correlation between oral hygiene and periodontal conditions using radiographic data. Methods: Across-sectional study design was used and radio-graphic data of 1000 patients (aged 16 years or above) from King Abdul Aziz UniversityFaculty of Dentistry (KAUFD) was assessed. The patients were divided into four groups based on their type of restoration; such asamalgam (77), composite (65), a crown (44), and temporary (11). Data was collected through questionnaire-based approach, which wasanalyzed statistically using SPSS. Results: Majority of the patients had fair oral hygiene (53.8%). The correlation analysis of oral hygienewith the restoration surface (p-value 0.571) and control tooth surface (p-value 0.476) was insignificant. Similar results were obtained forcase tooth (crown restoration) (p-value, .356) and control tooth (p-value, .925). However, there was significant effect of oral hygiene onrestored tooth bone loss (p-value, 0.004) and control tooth bone loss (p-value, 0.003). Conclusion: The study presents instigating initiativesto reinforce oral hygiene and educate general masses about periodontal conditions and its prevention