Title of article :
A comparison of resin-modified glass-ionomer and resin composite polymerisation shrinkage stress in a wet environment
Author/Authors :
Cheetham، نويسنده , , Joshua J. and Palamara، نويسنده , , Joseph E.A. and Tyas، نويسنده , , Martin J. and Burrow، نويسنده , , Michael F.، نويسنده ,
Issue Information :
ماهنامه با شماره پیاپی سال 2014
Abstract :
AbstractObjective
m of this study was to investigate the polymerisation shrinkage stress under water of four resin-modified glass-ionomers and three resin composite materials.
s
arent acrylic rods (5 mm diameter×30 mm) were prepared and secured into drill chucks connected to a universal testing machine. A plastics cup was placed around the lower rod and a distance of 1.00 mm was established between the prepared surfaces which provided a C-factor of 2.5. For composite only, an adhesive layer (Scotchbond Universal Adhesive) was placed on the rod ends and cured to achieve a bond with the rod end. Materials were placed between the rods and a strain gauge extensometer was installed. Materials were light cured for 40 s and the plastics cup was filled with ambient temperature water. To determine polymerisation shrinkage stress (σpol) three specimens of each material were tested for a 6-h period to determine mean maximum σpol (MPa), σpol rate (MPa/s) and final σpol (MPa). ANOVA and post hoc Tukey tests were used to determine significant differences between means.
s
ghest mean maximum σpol of (5.4±0.5) MPa was recorded for RMGIC and (4.8±1.0) MPa for composite. The lowest mean final σpol of (0.8±0.4) MPa was recorded for RMGIC. For mean maximum σpol, σpol rate and final σpol there were significant differences between materials within groups, although no significant difference (p>0.05) was observed when comparing the RMGIC group to the composite group.
sion
omparing mean σpol, maximum σpol, and σpol rates between individual RMGIC and composite materials significant differences (p<0.05) were observed. However when comparing the group RMGIC to composite no significant differences (p>0.05) were observed. The null hypothesis that there is no difference in the short term σpol of RMGIC materials when compared to composite materials is only partly rejected.
nce
d information is available on the comparison of RMGIC and resin composite σpol levels. This study provides information on the short term levels in a wet environment and will assist in understanding the initial σpol rates RMGIC place in cavities.
Keywords :
Resin composite , Polymerisation shrinkage stress , Polymerisation contraction stress , Resin-modified glass-ionomer
Journal title :
Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials
Journal title :
Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials