Evaluation of surface finish and polish of eight provisional restorative materials using acrylic bur and abrasive disk with and without pumice.

This study evaluated the effects of two finishing techniques and pumice polishing on the surface roughness of eight different provisional materials. Provisional materials included polymethylmethacrylate-based Alike, Snap, Trim and Jetand composite-based provisional materials Temphase, Protemp 3 Garant, Luxatemp and Integrity. Baseline surface roughness was measured by a profilometer, then the provisional materials were finished using extra fine acrylic burs or medium abrasive disks. The surface roughness of each sample was measured following finishing using a profilometer as previously stated. Each surface was then polished with pumice and the surface roughness was measured again. The data were analyzed using repeated measures of ANOVA and Bonferroni pairwise comparisons (alpha = 0.05). The results indicated that with composite provisional materials, the unfinished surfaces are smoother than with bur or abrasive-disk finished surfaces. Pumice application did not smooth the surface finish for all materials. The different types of provisional materials required different finishing techniques to produce the smoothest finishes.