ABSTRACT
A resistência à tração diametral (TD) é um requisito essencial para o sucesso clínico das restaurações. Dessa forma, este estudo objetivou avaliar a resistência à TD de três tipos cimentos ionômero de vidro (CIV) em comparação com uma resina composta, todos utilizados em seis postos de saúde pública do município de Duque de Caxias/RJ. O TD foi realizado em uma máquina universal com uma célula de carga de 200 Kgf. Os valores médios de resistência à TD, em MPa, foram: 11,46 (CIV A), 10 (CIV B), 31 (CIV C) e 38,13 (Resina). Os resultados foram analisados pelos testes Anova e Turkey (p < 0,05). Concluiu-se que os CIVs apresentaram resistência à TD semelhante entre eles, porém inferior à resina, mas ainda sendo uma ótima opção para restauração preconizada pelo Serviço Público de Saúde (SUS).
The diametric tensile strength (DT) is a prerequisite for clinical success of restoration. Thus, this study aimed to evaluate the resistance of DT of three types of glass ionomer cements (IO) for restorative, and compare with a composite resin. Eight samples of each material were using by bipartite matrices. All of the materials were used according to manufacturers. The DT test was performed using a universal testing machine with a load of 200 kgf. The results were analyzed using Anova and Turkey (p <0.05). Mean values for resistance to DT in MPa were: 11.46 (IO A), 10 (IO B), 31 (IO C) and 38.13 (Resin composite). We concluded that IO showed similar DT among themselves.
Subject(s)
Tensile Strength , In Vitro Techniques , Composite Resins , Dental Materials , Glass Ionomer CementsABSTRACT
A resistência à tração diametral (TD) é um requisito essencial para o sucesso clínico das restaurações. Dessa forma, este estudo objetivou avaliar a resistência à TD de três tipos cimentos ionômero de vidro (CIV) em comparação com uma resina composta, todos utilizados em seis postos de saúde pública do município de Duque de Caxias/RJ. O TD foi realizado em uma máquina universal com uma célula de carga de 200 Kgf. Os valores médios de resistência à TD, em MPa, foram: 11,46 (CIV A), 10 (CIV B), 31 (CIV C) e 38,13 (Resina). Os resultados foram analisados pelos testes Anova e Turkey (p < 0,05). Concluiu-se que os CIVs apresentaram resistência à TD semelhante entre eles, porém inferior à resina, mas ainda sendo uma ótima opção para restauração preconizada pelo Serviço Público de Saúde (SUS).
The diametric tensile strength (DT) is a prerequisite for clinical success of restoration. Thus, this study aimed to evaluate the resistance of DT of three types of glass ionomer cements (IO) for restorative, and compare with a composite resin. Eight samples of each material were using by bipartite matrices. All of the materials were used according to manufacturers. The DT test was performed using a universal testing machine with a load of 200 kgf. The results were analyzed using Anova and Turkey (p <0.05). Mean values for resistance to DT in MPa were: 11.46 (IO A), 10 (IO B), 31 (IO C) and 38.13 (Resin composite). We concluded that IO showed similar DT among themselves.
Subject(s)
Tensile Strength , Composite Resins , Dental Materials , Glass Ionomer CementsABSTRACT
The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of high speed (HS) and air abrasion (AA) instruments on groups of teeth (deciduous, permanent, bovine), in terms of preparation time, topography and presence of smear layer. Each group consisted of 5 teeth that had their buccal/lingual surfaces prepared by using either HS or AA. All procedures were standardized and timed. The teeth were then sectioned and prepared for evaluation of both the topography and the presence of smear layer by scanning electron microscopy. As regards preparation time, HS yielded preparations 1.5 times quicker than AA did on the three types of dental substrates (Wilcoxon test, p < 0.05). In both techniques (Kruskal-Wallis Test, p < 0.05) the preparation time was influenced by the dental substrate, particularly in deciduous teeth (Mann-Whitney test with Bonferoni's correction, p < 0.017), which required a longer preparation time. In the descriptive analysis of the topography, no difference was found between the substrates. Nonetheless, the different instruments used determined distinctive topographies. Both techniques produced a smear layer (÷2 McNemar, p > 0.05) in all substrates, but with different formations. In conclusion, the HS instrument was found to be more rapid than the AA. No difference was found between the three dental substrates as regards both the topography and the presence of smear layer. The differences found in the present study were only in relation to the effects of each instrument used.