El Mourad Aminah M
Department of Restorative Dental Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Open Dent J. 2018 Sep 28;12:664-678. doi: 10.2174/1745017901814010664. eCollection 2018.
The rapid developments in the field of adhesive dental materials have led to improvements in many aspects of clinical dentistry. Adhesive bond strength plays an important role in determining the clinical performance and longevity of dental restorations. Nevertheless, bond strength tests have never been well-standardized, although a number of important recommendations have been made.
The aim of this paper is to critically review the validity of different bond strength testing methods for assessment of bonding effectiveness of adhesive materials to tooth structure and discuss factors that may affect bond strength measurement.
Relevant literature published between 1983 and 2018 was collected and reviewed from the PubMed database and Google scholar resources.
Results of the current bond testing methods should be used to compare materials tested under the same laboratory settings, but they shouldn't be used to make direct inferences on their clinical behaviour. Shear and micro-shear tests, result in non-uniform stress distribution, stress concentration at the substrate area, and predominantly tensile stresses rather than shear stresses. Micro-tensile bond tests provide many advantages over the shear tests, although these methods are technique sensitive and labour intensive.
Bond strength testing methods should be well-standardized, but there are many factors that cannot be fully controlled which leads to variation and misinterpretation of the data about the bonding abilities of adhesives.
New adhesive materials should be subjected to a combination of testing protocols to properly assess their bonding effectiveness.
牙科粘结材料领域的快速发展已使临床牙科的许多方面得到改善。粘结强度在确定牙齿修复体的临床性能和使用寿命方面起着重要作用。然而，尽管已提出了一些重要建议，但粘结强度测试从未得到很好的标准化。
本文旨在批判性地回顾不同粘结强度测试方法评估粘结材料与牙齿结构粘结效果的有效性，并讨论可能影响粘结强度测量的因素。
从PubMed数据库和谷歌学术资源中收集并回顾了1983年至2018年期间发表的相关文献。
当前粘结测试方法的结果应用于比较在相同实验室设置下测试的材料，但不应直接用于推断其临床行为。剪切和微剪切测试会导致应力分布不均匀、基底区域应力集中，且主要是拉应力而非剪应力。微拉伸粘结测试比剪切测试具有许多优势，尽管这些方法对技术敏感且劳动强度大。
粘结强度测试方法应得到很好的标准化，但有许多因素无法完全控制，这导致关于粘结剂粘结能力的数据存在差异和误解。
新的粘结材料应采用多种测试方案进行测试，以正确评估其粘结效果。
