Are encapsulated anterior glass-ionomer restoratives better than their hand-mixed equivalents?

Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10147/124125
Title:
Are encapsulated anterior glass-ionomer restoratives better than their hand-mixed equivalents?
Authors:
Dowling, Adam H; Fleming, Garry J P
Affiliation:
Materials Science Unit, Division of Oral Biosciences, Dublin Dental School & Hospital, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin 2, Ireland. adam.dowling@dental.tcd.ie
Citation:
Are encapsulated anterior glass-ionomer restoratives better than their hand-mixed equivalents? 2009, 37 (2):133-40 J Dent
Journal:
Journal of dentistry
Issue Date:
Feb-2009
URI:
http://hdl.handle.net/10147/124125
DOI:
10.1016/j.jdent.2008.10.006
PubMed ID:
19059689
Abstract:
The performance of encapsulated anterior GI restoratives were compared with their hand-mixed equivalents for the range of powder to liquid mixing ratios routinely encountered clinically. The clinically induced variability of powder to liquid mixing variations of an anhydrous GI restorative formulation was also compared with conventional GI restorative formulations that contained a polyalkenoic acidic liquid.; Mean compressive fracture strengths, mean elastic moduli and mean total volumetric wear were determined for the encapsulated anterior GI restoratives mechanically mixed in a Capmix or Rotomix machine and the hand-mixed GI restoratives prepared with powder contents reduced from that recommended by the manufacturer (100%) in 10% increments to 50% for a constant weight of liquid. Multiple comparisons of the group means were made using a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey's multiple range tests employed at P<0.05.; For the encapsulated GI restoratives, the mean compressive fracture strength, mean elastic modulus and in-vitro wear resistance were significantly increased compared with their hand-mixed equivalents prepared with powder contents below that recommended by the manufacturers. The conventional GI restoratives resulted in a linear deterioration (R2>0.95) of the mean compressive fracture strength and mean elastic modulus with powder content compared with the bi-modal deterioration for the anhydrous GI restorative.; Encapsulated anterior GI restoratives outperform their hand-mixed equivalents for the range of powder to liquid mixing ratios routinely encountered clinically such that they are advocated for use in clinical practice. Anhydrous GI restorative formulations are more susceptible to clinically induced variability on mixing compared with conventional GI restorative formulations that contained a polyalkenoic acidic liquid.
Item Type:
Article
Language:
en
MeSH:
Capsules; Chemistry, Pharmaceutical; Compressive Strength; Dental Restoration Wear; Dental Restoration, Permanent; Elastic Modulus; Glass Ionomer Cements; Humans; Imaging, Three-Dimensional; Maleates; Materials Testing; Powders; Solutions; Stress, Mechanical; Surface Properties; Time Factors
ISSN:
0300-5712

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.contributor.authorDowling, Adam Hen
dc.contributor.authorFleming, Garry J Pen
dc.date.accessioned2011-03-10T10:12:13Z-
dc.date.available2011-03-10T10:12:13Z-
dc.date.issued2009-02-
dc.identifier.citationAre encapsulated anterior glass-ionomer restoratives better than their hand-mixed equivalents? 2009, 37 (2):133-40 J Denten
dc.identifier.issn0300-5712-
dc.identifier.pmid19059689-
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.jdent.2008.10.006-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10147/124125-
dc.description.abstractThe performance of encapsulated anterior GI restoratives were compared with their hand-mixed equivalents for the range of powder to liquid mixing ratios routinely encountered clinically. The clinically induced variability of powder to liquid mixing variations of an anhydrous GI restorative formulation was also compared with conventional GI restorative formulations that contained a polyalkenoic acidic liquid.-
dc.description.abstractMean compressive fracture strengths, mean elastic moduli and mean total volumetric wear were determined for the encapsulated anterior GI restoratives mechanically mixed in a Capmix or Rotomix machine and the hand-mixed GI restoratives prepared with powder contents reduced from that recommended by the manufacturer (100%) in 10% increments to 50% for a constant weight of liquid. Multiple comparisons of the group means were made using a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey's multiple range tests employed at P<0.05.-
dc.description.abstractFor the encapsulated GI restoratives, the mean compressive fracture strength, mean elastic modulus and in-vitro wear resistance were significantly increased compared with their hand-mixed equivalents prepared with powder contents below that recommended by the manufacturers. The conventional GI restoratives resulted in a linear deterioration (R2>0.95) of the mean compressive fracture strength and mean elastic modulus with powder content compared with the bi-modal deterioration for the anhydrous GI restorative.-
dc.description.abstractEncapsulated anterior GI restoratives outperform their hand-mixed equivalents for the range of powder to liquid mixing ratios routinely encountered clinically such that they are advocated for use in clinical practice. Anhydrous GI restorative formulations are more susceptible to clinically induced variability on mixing compared with conventional GI restorative formulations that contained a polyalkenoic acidic liquid.-
dc.language.isoenen
dc.subject.meshCapsules-
dc.subject.meshChemistry, Pharmaceutical-
dc.subject.meshCompressive Strength-
dc.subject.meshDental Restoration Wear-
dc.subject.meshDental Restoration, Permanent-
dc.subject.meshElastic Modulus-
dc.subject.meshGlass Ionomer Cements-
dc.subject.meshHumans-
dc.subject.meshImaging, Three-Dimensional-
dc.subject.meshMaleates-
dc.subject.meshMaterials Testing-
dc.subject.meshPowders-
dc.subject.meshSolutions-
dc.subject.meshStress, Mechanical-
dc.subject.meshSurface Properties-
dc.subject.meshTime Factors-
dc.titleAre encapsulated anterior glass-ionomer restoratives better than their hand-mixed equivalents?en
dc.typeArticleen
dc.contributor.departmentMaterials Science Unit, Division of Oral Biosciences, Dublin Dental School & Hospital, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin 2, Ireland. adam.dowling@dental.tcd.ieen
dc.identifier.journalJournal of dentistryen
dc.description.provinceLeinster-
All Items in Lenus, The Irish Health Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.