Collett A R, Cook W D, West V C
Angliss Hospital, Upper Ferntree Gully, Victoria.
Aust Dent J. 1994 Oct;39(5):298-305. doi: 10.1111/j.1834-7819.1994.tb05566.x.
The chemical composition, thermal behaviour and mechanical properties of three tooth positioner materials, Urethane P1 (P1), White Rubber (WR) and Elastocryl (EL) were investigated. Infra-red spectrophotometry indicated the P1 polyurethane material to be of the polyether type, and EL to be a blend of poly(ethyl methacrylate) and poly(methyl methacrylate) while WR appeared to be filled cis-poly (isoprene) (natural rubber). The glass transition temperature (Tg) for EL was determined as approximately 10 degrees C, and for both P1 and WR the Tg was less than -50 degrees C. The stress relaxation behaviour was assessed in compression by measuring the stress variation with time. The results for all three materials conformed to the superelastic theory of rubber elasticity. EL exhibited both a more rapid rate and higher degree of stress relaxation than did P1 and WR. Recovery from deformation was assessed by compressing cylinders for given periods of time and then measuring the level of reduced residual strain of the material with time. All three materials exhibited significant residual strain (epsilon(t)) over 'clinically relevant' time periods, and the reduced residual strain (epsilon(t)/epsilon(O)) following deformation was greater for EL than P1 or WR. There was some indication that the three materials have some permanent set following deformation. It was concluded that, in considering desirable mechanical properties of tooth positioner materials, EL is the least suitable of the three examined, with none of the materials being ideal.
