[Home ] [Archive]    
:: Main :: About :: Current Issue :: Archive :: Search :: Submit :: Contact ::
:: Volume 4, Issue 2 (Journal of Research in Dental & Maxillofacial Sciences Spring 2019) ::
J Res Dentomaxillofac Sci 2019, 4(2): 26-31 Back to browse issues page
In-Vitro Comparative Study of the Effect of Four Finishing and Polishing Tools on Surface Roughness of a Microhybrid Resin Composite
S Nemati Anarakiu1, H Kazemi2, Z GHafari3, Z Naser4, T Bitaraf * 5
1- Assistant professor, Restorative Dept, faculty of Dentistry,Tehran medical sciences, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
2- Assistant professor, Restorative Dept, faculty of Dentistry,Tehran medical sciences, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
3- Dentist, Tehran, Iran
4- Dentist, Boston, Massachusetts, United States.
5- Assistant professor, Dental Implant Research Center, Dental Faculty, Tehran Medical Sciences, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran , taherehbitaraf@yahoo.com
Abstract:   (67 Views)
Background and Aim: The complications of unwanted surface roughness of composite restorations are highly common due to the increasing use of this restorative material. Therefore, the present study was designed to compare the effect of four finishing and polishing (F&P) tools on surface roughness of microhybrid resin composites.
Materials and Methods: This experimental study was performed on 42 samples of CLEARFIL™ AP-X ​​microhybrid composite, which were divided into four groups of different F&P methods and one control group as follows: control (n=2), Flexi-D discs (n=10), Flexi-D + diamond polishing paste (n=10), Intensive twisted rubber polisher (n=10), and Rubber Polisher Teco (n=10). The samples were examined by profilometry. Surface roughness (Ra) of each specimen was measured at three points, and the mean value was considered as surface roughness. The results were analyzed by analysis of variance (ANOVA) and post hoc statistical tests.
Results: The surface roughness of composite discs in an ascending order was as follows: control (0.048±0.014 µm), Flexi-D disc (0.179±0.132 µm), Intensive twisted rubber polisher (0.233±0.105 µm), Flexi-D disc with diamond polishing paste (0.232±0.141 µm), and Rubber Polisher Teco (0.251±0.087 µm; P=0.001). The difference between the two groups of Flexi-D disc with diamond polishing paste and Rubber Polisher Teco was not statistically significant (P=0.742). The level of surface roughness in Flexi-D samples was significantly lower than that of the other samples (P<0.05).
Conclusion: It seems that the Flexi-D disc is the best F&P tool for microhybrid resin composites.
Keywords: Dental Polishing / Instrumentation, Composite Resin, Surface Properties, Materials Testing
Full-Text [PDF 283 kb]   (13 Downloads) |   |   Full-Text (HTML)  (10 Views)  
Type of Study: Original article | Subject: Oral & maxillofacial surgery
* Corresponding Author Address: Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
Send email to the article author

Add your comments about this article
Your username or Email:

CAPTCHA


XML     Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Nemati Anarakiu S, Kazemi H, GHafari Z, Naser Z, Bitaraf T. In-Vitro Comparative Study of the Effect of Four Finishing and Polishing Tools on Surface Roughness of a Microhybrid Resin Composite. J Res Dentomaxillofac Sci. 2019; 4 (2) :26-31
URL: http://jrdms.dentaliau.ac.ir/article-1-256-en.html


Volume 4, Issue 2 (Journal of Research in Dental & Maxillofacial Sciences Spring 2019) Back to browse issues page
Journal of Research in Dental and Maxillofacial Sciences
Persian site map - English site map - Created in 0.06 seconds with 32 queries by YEKTAWEB 3977