An evaluation of the surface characteristics of a facial prosthetic elastomer. Part III: Wettability and hardness.

Silicone facial prosthetic elastomers may cause tissue damage by abrasion. Such damage is a particular concern when prostheses are mechanically retained against tissues compromised by adjunctive therapy. The hardness and wettability of Cosmesil material was compared with that of Molloplast-B material. The stone test surfaces were separated with soap, sodium alginate, silicone paste, and left untreated. A polished stainless steel surface was prepared as a control. The specimens of Cosmesil and Molloplast-B materials were processed against each of these surfaces. Ten specimens of each material were processed against the five different surfaces. Wettability was evaluated by measuring the contact angle with a profile projector. Indentation hardness was measured with a Shore-A durometer. Statistical analysis involved multiple analyses of variation and Tukey's procedures (in all cases p less than 0.05). Molloplast-B material was found to have a higher wettability than Cosmesil material (means = 3.22 degrees higher); sodium alginate separator yielded silicone specimens with the highest wettability; Molloplast-B material was found to be harder than Cosmesil material (means = 9.75 Shore-A indentation units harder). The softest silicones were processed with soap separator. Silicone grease yielded the hardest specimens. The mechanical performance of Cosmesil material would be enhanced by increasing the surface wettability. The hardness of Cosmesil material is within the ideal range for a maxillofacial prosthetic elastomer.