Effects of Disinfection on Orthodontic Plaster Models

N. Beleva
{"title":"Effects of Disinfection on Orthodontic Plaster Models","authors":"N. Beleva","doi":"10.36648/1791-809X.15.2.808","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background and aims: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of disinfection and different brands of alginate impression material on the accuracy of orthodontic stone models. Materials and methods: Six different alginate impression materials and four different disinfectants were included in the study. A total of 168 impressions were taken and divided into 24 groups. Fifty-six impressions taken with extended pour-type alginates were kept in sealed plastic bags for four days and then poured. One hundred and twelve impressions were poured immediately after the disinfection process. A 3-D laser scanner was used for dimensional measurements on the vestibule surface area, while the mesial–distal width of the right upper molar was measured with screen caliper software. Results: This study showed that the contraction of models varied significantly depending on the alginate material and disinfectant. Evaluation of the upper first molar showed that molar contraction varied between 1.2 and 3.2% in dimension. According to molar data, the best accuracy was obtained from Blueprint-Zeta, while the worst was obtained from the Hydrogum Ext Pour–NaOCl alginate– disinfectant combination. Two-way ANOVA of data from the vestibule surface area showed significant results for all pairwise comparisons of alginate and disinfectant materials and their interactions. According to the results of the two-way ANOVA, the best accuracy was obtained from Hydrogum and Blueprint alginates with Unident disinfectant. The worst accuracy was obtained from Hydrogum Ext Pour alginate with Zeta disinfectant. Conclusions: The dimensions of stone models produced from disinfectant-treated alginate impression materials demonstrate various degrees of contraction.","PeriodicalId":12868,"journal":{"name":"Health science journal","volume":"281 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health science journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36648/1791-809X.15.2.808","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and aims: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of disinfection and different brands of alginate impression material on the accuracy of orthodontic stone models. Materials and methods: Six different alginate impression materials and four different disinfectants were included in the study. A total of 168 impressions were taken and divided into 24 groups. Fifty-six impressions taken with extended pour-type alginates were kept in sealed plastic bags for four days and then poured. One hundred and twelve impressions were poured immediately after the disinfection process. A 3-D laser scanner was used for dimensional measurements on the vestibule surface area, while the mesial–distal width of the right upper molar was measured with screen caliper software. Results: This study showed that the contraction of models varied significantly depending on the alginate material and disinfectant. Evaluation of the upper first molar showed that molar contraction varied between 1.2 and 3.2% in dimension. According to molar data, the best accuracy was obtained from Blueprint-Zeta, while the worst was obtained from the Hydrogum Ext Pour–NaOCl alginate– disinfectant combination. Two-way ANOVA of data from the vestibule surface area showed significant results for all pairwise comparisons of alginate and disinfectant materials and their interactions. According to the results of the two-way ANOVA, the best accuracy was obtained from Hydrogum and Blueprint alginates with Unident disinfectant. The worst accuracy was obtained from Hydrogum Ext Pour alginate with Zeta disinfectant. Conclusions: The dimensions of stone models produced from disinfectant-treated alginate impression materials demonstrate various degrees of contraction.
消毒对正畸石膏模型的影响
背景与目的:本研究的目的是评估消毒和不同品牌藻酸盐印模材料对正畸石模型准确性的影响。材料与方法:采用6种不同的藻酸盐印模材料和4种不同的消毒剂进行研究。共有168个印象被分成24组。56个用加长式海藻酸盐拍摄的印痕在密封塑料袋中保存4天,然后倒入。在消毒过程后立即倒入112个印痕。使用三维激光扫描仪对前庭表面积进行尺寸测量,使用屏幕卡尺软件测量右上磨牙的中、远端宽度。结果:本研究表明,模型的收缩随藻酸盐材料和消毒剂的不同而有显著差异。对上颌第一磨牙的评估显示磨牙收缩尺寸在1.2 - 3.2%之间。根据摩尔数据,Blueprint-Zeta法测定的准确度最好,而Hydrogum Ext - pur - naocl海藻酸盐-消毒剂组合测定的准确度最差。来自前厅表面积数据的双向方差分析显示,海藻酸盐和消毒剂材料及其相互作用的所有两两比较都有显著结果。双向方差分析结果表明,Unident消毒液对水胶和蓝本海藻酸盐的去除率最高。Zeta消毒剂对海藻酸氢胶的准确度最差。结论:用经过消毒处理的藻酸盐印模材料制作的石材模型尺寸表现出不同程度的收缩。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信