Comparative Evaluation of Flexural Strength of Provisional Crown and Bridge Materials-An Invitro Study.

INTRODUCTION

Provisional restorations serve a key role as a functional and esthetic try-in for the design of the final prosthesis. During selection of materials for this restoration, clinicians must consider physical properties, ease of handling, cost and patient satisfaction and approval.

AIM

To evaluate and compare the flexural strength of provisional crown and bridge materials available commercially.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This in-vitro study was done to compare the flexural strength of six temporary crown and bridge materials available commercially at 24 hours, 8 days and after repair. Three poly methyl methacrylate based materials (DPI, SC10 and Trulon) and three bis-acrylic based composite resins (Protemp, Cooltemp and Luxatemp) were selected. A total of 72 specimens of dimensions 64mm×10mm×2.5mm were prepared from these materials (12 from each material) and divided into two groups (n=36). Specimens were stored in artificial saliva and were fractured after 24 hours and 8 days using Universal Testing Machine. The fractured samples from the 8 days study were then subjected to repair. A uniform space of 2mm and a 450 bevel was maintained for all the repaired samples for better distribution of forces. Flexural strength of these repaired samples was recorded using the same machine. RESULTs were recorded and statistically analysed by one-way Anova and Post hoc tests.

RESULT

RESULTs revealed that there was decrease in flexural strength for all the materials tested from 24 hours to 8 days, though flexural strength between poly methyl methacrylate and bis-acrylic resins was similar at 24 hours and 8 days time interval. A substantial decrease was noticed in the strength of bis-acrylic composite resins after repair.

CONCLUSION

From the current study it can be suggested that though there is decrease in flexural strength for all the materials from 24 hours to 8 days, both can be used to fabricate the provisional restorations. However, in the event of a fracture of a bis-acrylic provisional restoration, it may be more advantageous to make a new provisional restoration than to repair the fractured one.