{"title":"抛光方法对不同临时修复材料表面粗糙度的影响","authors":"İ. Kavut, Mehmet Uğur, Özgür Ozan Tanrıkut","doi":"10.5577/intdentres.2022.vol12.no3.7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of different polishing methods on the surface roughness of temporary prosthetic restorations.\nMethodology: In this study, 200 specimens were obtained from Structur 2, Imident, FSM Duo CAD, and Han Temp Crown. All specimens were sanded with 400-, 800-, and 1000-grit silicon carbide. Next, the specimens were divided into five subgroups (n = 10). The specimens in first group were sanded with 1200-, 1600-, and 2000-grit silicon carbide sandpaper. The second group was polished with an aluminum oxide-containing disc. The third group was polished with a diamond-containing pad. A glaze bond was applied to the specimens in the fourth group. The fifth group was glazed with a coat of nano-filled resin. Then, the surface roughness of all specimens was measured with a profilometer. A two-way ANOVA test was performed using SPSS 20.0. Finally, the microstructures of the surfaces were examined by a scanning electron microscope at 5000× magnification.\nResults: Statistically significant results were obtained between the temporary materials and polishing methods in terms of surface roughness (p < 0.05). For the polishing method, the highest surface roughness values were observed in the control group (0.50 ± 0.15). The lowest surface roughness values were observed in the Equia Forte GC coat group (0.25 ± 0.10). Among the temporary crown materials, the highest roughness was observed in Imicryl specimens. (0.45 ± 0.17), while the least roughness was the polymethyl-methacrylate (PMMA) specimens (0.17 ± 0.10).\nConclusion: Surface polishing and finishing procedures might positively affect the surface roughness of temporary materials. Furthermore, materials made via computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) demonstrate structural advantages and may be preferable.\n \nHow to cite this article: \nHow to cite this article: Kavut İ, Uğur M, Tanrıkut ÖO. Effect of polishing methods on the surface roughness of different temporary restorative materials. Int Dent Res 2022;12(3):149-57. https://doi.org/10.5577/intdentres.2022.vol12.no3.7\n \nLinguistic Revision: The English in this manuscript has been checked by at least two professional editors, both native speakers of English.\n ","PeriodicalId":31322,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Clinical Dental Research Organization","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effect of polishing methods on the surface roughness of different temporary restorative materials\",\"authors\":\"İ. Kavut, Mehmet Uğur, Özgür Ozan Tanrıkut\",\"doi\":\"10.5577/intdentres.2022.vol12.no3.7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Aim: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of different polishing methods on the surface roughness of temporary prosthetic restorations.\\nMethodology: In this study, 200 specimens were obtained from Structur 2, Imident, FSM Duo CAD, and Han Temp Crown. All specimens were sanded with 400-, 800-, and 1000-grit silicon carbide. Next, the specimens were divided into five subgroups (n = 10). The specimens in first group were sanded with 1200-, 1600-, and 2000-grit silicon carbide sandpaper. The second group was polished with an aluminum oxide-containing disc. The third group was polished with a diamond-containing pad. A glaze bond was applied to the specimens in the fourth group. The fifth group was glazed with a coat of nano-filled resin. Then, the surface roughness of all specimens was measured with a profilometer. A two-way ANOVA test was performed using SPSS 20.0. Finally, the microstructures of the surfaces were examined by a scanning electron microscope at 5000× magnification.\\nResults: Statistically significant results were obtained between the temporary materials and polishing methods in terms of surface roughness (p < 0.05). For the polishing method, the highest surface roughness values were observed in the control group (0.50 ± 0.15). The lowest surface roughness values were observed in the Equia Forte GC coat group (0.25 ± 0.10). Among the temporary crown materials, the highest roughness was observed in Imicryl specimens. (0.45 ± 0.17), while the least roughness was the polymethyl-methacrylate (PMMA) specimens (0.17 ± 0.10).\\nConclusion: Surface polishing and finishing procedures might positively affect the surface roughness of temporary materials. Furthermore, materials made via computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) demonstrate structural advantages and may be preferable.\\n \\nHow to cite this article: \\nHow to cite this article: Kavut İ, Uğur M, Tanrıkut ÖO. Effect of polishing methods on the surface roughness of different temporary restorative materials. Int Dent Res 2022;12(3):149-57. https://doi.org/10.5577/intdentres.2022.vol12.no3.7\\n \\nLinguistic Revision: The English in this manuscript has been checked by at least two professional editors, both native speakers of English.\\n \",\"PeriodicalId\":31322,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of International Clinical Dental Research Organization\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of International Clinical Dental Research Organization\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5577/intdentres.2022.vol12.no3.7\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of International Clinical Dental Research Organization","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5577/intdentres.2022.vol12.no3.7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:研究不同抛光方法对临时修复体表面粗糙度的影响。方法:在本研究中,从struct2, Imident, FSM Duo CAD和Han Temp冠中获得200个标本。所有的样品都用400、800和1000粒度的碳化硅打磨。接下来,将标本分为5个亚组(n = 10)。第一组试样分别用1200、1600、2000粒碳化硅砂纸进行打磨。第二组用含氧化铝的圆盘抛光。第三组用含钻石的衬垫抛光。在第四组标本上应用釉粘接。第五组被涂上了一层纳米填充树脂。然后,用轮廓仪测量所有试样的表面粗糙度。采用SPSS 20.0进行双因素方差分析。最后,用扫描电子显微镜在5000倍放大镜下观察表面的微观结构。结果:临时材料与抛光方法的表面粗糙度差异有统计学意义(p < 0.05)。抛光组的表面粗糙度值最高(0.50±0.15)。Equia Forte GC涂层组的表面粗糙度值最低(0.25±0.10)。在临时冠材料中,Imicryl材料的粗糙度最高。(0.45±0.17),聚甲基丙烯酸甲酯(PMMA)的粗糙度最小(0.17±0.10)。结论:表面抛光处理对临时材料的表面粗糙度有积极影响。此外,通过计算机辅助设计和计算机辅助制造(CAD-CAM)制造的材料显示出结构上的优势,可能是更可取的。如何引用本文:如何引用本文:Kavut İ, Uğur M, Tanrıkut ÖO。抛光方法对不同临时修复材料表面粗糙度的影响。国际医学杂志,2016;12(3):149-57。https://doi.org/10.5577/intdentres.2022.vol12.no3.7语言修改:本手稿中的英语已由至少两名专业编辑检查,他们都是英语母语者。
Effect of polishing methods on the surface roughness of different temporary restorative materials
Aim: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of different polishing methods on the surface roughness of temporary prosthetic restorations.
Methodology: In this study, 200 specimens were obtained from Structur 2, Imident, FSM Duo CAD, and Han Temp Crown. All specimens were sanded with 400-, 800-, and 1000-grit silicon carbide. Next, the specimens were divided into five subgroups (n = 10). The specimens in first group were sanded with 1200-, 1600-, and 2000-grit silicon carbide sandpaper. The second group was polished with an aluminum oxide-containing disc. The third group was polished with a diamond-containing pad. A glaze bond was applied to the specimens in the fourth group. The fifth group was glazed with a coat of nano-filled resin. Then, the surface roughness of all specimens was measured with a profilometer. A two-way ANOVA test was performed using SPSS 20.0. Finally, the microstructures of the surfaces were examined by a scanning electron microscope at 5000× magnification.
Results: Statistically significant results were obtained between the temporary materials and polishing methods in terms of surface roughness (p < 0.05). For the polishing method, the highest surface roughness values were observed in the control group (0.50 ± 0.15). The lowest surface roughness values were observed in the Equia Forte GC coat group (0.25 ± 0.10). Among the temporary crown materials, the highest roughness was observed in Imicryl specimens. (0.45 ± 0.17), while the least roughness was the polymethyl-methacrylate (PMMA) specimens (0.17 ± 0.10).
Conclusion: Surface polishing and finishing procedures might positively affect the surface roughness of temporary materials. Furthermore, materials made via computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) demonstrate structural advantages and may be preferable.
How to cite this article:
How to cite this article: Kavut İ, Uğur M, Tanrıkut ÖO. Effect of polishing methods on the surface roughness of different temporary restorative materials. Int Dent Res 2022;12(3):149-57. https://doi.org/10.5577/intdentres.2022.vol12.no3.7
Linguistic Revision: The English in this manuscript has been checked by at least two professional editors, both native speakers of English.