Gungor Hasan, Gundogdu Mustafa, Yesil Duymus Zeynep
Assistant Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Atatürk University, Erzurum, Turkey.
Research Assistant, Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Atatürk University, Erzurum, Turkey.
J Prosthet Dent. 2014 Nov;112(5):1271-7. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.03.023. Epub 2014 May 20.
The rough surface of denture base materials may cause plaque accumulation and staining. Thus, the effectiveness of polishing techniques should be known.
The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of chairside polishing kits and conventional laboratory techniques on the surface roughness of denture base and repair materials.
Ninety-six specimens, 50 ±1 mm in diameter and 0.5 ±0.05 thick, were fabricated from heat-polymerized acrylic resin (HP), polyamide resin (PR), and autopolymerizing resin (AP) and submitted to grinding with a tungsten carbide bur. The specimens were divided into 4 groups according to the polishing technique used: control group without polishing, conventional laboratory polishing, polished with Acrylic Polisher HP blue kit, and polished with AcryPoint polishing kit. Surface roughness (Ra) was measured after polishing with a profilometer. Data were analyzed with a 2-way analysis of variance, and the Tukey honestly significant difference (HSD) test was performed to identify significant differences (α=.05).
The polishing techniques significantly affected the Ra of denture base materials (P<.001). The highest mean average Ra was measured for the control group. The lowest Ra values were determined in specimens exposed to conventional laboratory polishing techniques. No significant differences were found between Acrylic Polisher HP blue and AcryPoint polishing kits (P>.05). Statistically significant differences were found in the Ra between the PR and both the HP and AP (P<.001); PR exhibited the highest Ra values.
Conventional laboratory polishing was the most effective polishing technique. A significantly smoother surface than that of the specimens in the control group was produced with chairside silicone polishing kits.
义齿基托材料的粗糙表面可能会导致菌斑积聚和染色。因此,应了解抛光技术的有效性。
本研究的目的是比较椅旁抛光套件和传统实验室技术对义齿基托及修复材料表面粗糙度的影响。
用热固化丙烯酸树脂(HP)、聚酰胺树脂(PR)和自凝树脂(AP)制作96个直径50±1mm、厚度0.5±0.05mm的样本,并用碳化钨车针进行打磨。根据所使用的抛光技术将样本分为4组:未抛光的对照组、传统实验室抛光、用Acrylic Polisher HP蓝色套件抛光以及用AcryPoint抛光套件抛光。抛光后用轮廓仪测量表面粗糙度(Ra)。数据采用双向方差分析进行分析,并进行Tukey真实显著差异(HSD)检验以确定显著差异(α = 0.05)。
抛光技术对义齿基托材料的Ra有显著影响(P < 0.001)。对照组的平均Ra最高。在采用传统实验室抛光技术的样本中测得的Ra值最低。Acrylic Polisher HP蓝色套件和AcryPoint抛光套件之间未发现显著差异(P > 0.05)。PR与HP和AP的Ra之间存在统计学显著差异(P < 0.001);PR的Ra值最高。
传统实验室抛光是最有效的抛光技术。椅旁硅胶抛光套件产生的表面比对照组样本的表面明显更光滑。