Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences) >
Influence of different mixing pads on physical and mechanical properties of glass ionomer cement
Received date: 2019-02-28
Online published: 2019-10-23
Supported by
Supported by Youth Research Fund of Peaking University Hospital of Stomatology(PKUSS20160203)
Objective: To analyze the influence of different mixing pads on the physical and mechanical properties of glass ionomer cement.Methods: Three different glass ionomer base cements were mixed with a plastic spatula on three different mixing pads including paper pad, glass pad and silicon pad whose HS were 40, 60 and 80. The GIC was packed into stainless steel molds to get specimens. Surface roughness、surface hardness and compressive strength were evaluated. Results: As for compressive strength, CF: There was the highest mean compressive strength that was significantly higher than those of silicon pad 60 group, paper 60 group and paper 20 group in silicon pad 40 group,the differences P values were 0.002 0.027, and 0.036, statistically significant difference between the above groups (P<0.05). IX:there was the highest mean compressive strength that was significantly higher than those of silicon pad 60 group in paper pad 20 group,the differences P value was 0.008, statistically significant (P<0.05). FX:there was the highest mean compressive strength that was no significantly higher than those of paper pad 20 group in silicon pad 40 group, but was significantly higher than those of the other groups. As for surface hardness, CF: there was the highest mean surface hardness that was significantly higher than those of silicon pad 60 and 80 group, paper 60 group in silicon pad 40 group, the differences P value was 0.021, 0.001, 0.032, 0.008 and 0.016, statistically significant difference between the above groups (P<0.05). IX and FX: there was no statistical significance between any two groups in surface hardness. As for surface roughness, CF: there was no statistical significance between any two groups in surface roughness. IX: there was the lowest mean surface roughness that was significantly lower than those of paper pad 40 and 60 group in glass pad group, the differences P values were 0.003 and 0.027, statistically significant difference between the above groups (P<0.05). FX: there was the lowest mean surface roughness that was significantly lower than those of paper pad 60 group in glass pad group, the differences P value was 0.018, showing a statistical difference (P<0.05). Conclusion:Mixing glass ionomer cement on silicon pad 40 results in higher compressive strength and lower surface roughness, worthy of clinical popularization.
Jing-ying HU , Li LI , Qian-mei ZHOU , Rui-yu DING , Ran SHANG , Wei BAI . Influence of different mixing pads on physical and mechanical properties of glass ionomer cement[J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2019 , 51(5) : 964 -967 . DOI: 10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2019.05.029
| [1] | Nicholson JW . Adhesive dental materials and their durability[J]. INT J Adhes, 2000,20(1):11-16. |
| [2] | Yip HK, Tay FR, Ngo HC , et al. Bonding of contemporary ionomer Hoff-man’s cements to dentin[J]. J Dent Mart, 2001,17(5):456-470. |
| [3] | 冯瑶, 冯思聪, 王建平 . 玻璃离子水门汀加入改良纳米羟基磷灰石后的性能[J]. 中国组织工程研究杂志, 2013,17(42):7382-7388. |
| [4] | McCarthy MF, Hondrum S . Mechanical and bond strength properties of light-cured and chemically cured glass ionomer cements[J]. J Orthod Dentofac, 1994,105(2):135-141. |
| [5] | Silva RC, Zuanon ACC, Esberard HIL . In vitro mierohardness of assionomer cements[J]. I Mater Sei Mater Med, 2007,1(1):139-142. |
| [6] | Sulaiman T, Abdulmajeed A, Altitinchi A , et al. Effect of resin-modified glass ionomer cement dispensing/mixing methods on mechanical properties[J]. J Oper Dent, 2018,43(4):158-165. |
| [7] | Craig R, Powers J. Sakaguchi R . Craig's restorative dental materials[M]. 13th ed. St. Louis, Mo: Mosby Elsevierp, 2012: 84-182. |
| [8] | Ellakuria J, Triana R, Mnguez N , et al. Effect of one-year water storage on the surface microhardness of resin-modified versus conventional glass-ionomer cements[J]. Dent Mater, 2003,19(2):86-90. |
| [9] | Prentice LH, Tyas MJ, Burrow MF . The effect of particle size distribution on an experimental glass-ionomer cement[J]. Dent Mater, 2005,21(6):505-510. |
| [10] | Pedrini DL, Candido MS, Rodrigues AL . Analysis of surface roughness of glass-ionomer cements and compomer[J]. Oral Rehabil, 2003,30(7):714-719. |
| [11] | Bagheri RL, Burrow MF, Tyas MJ . Surface characteristics of aesthetic restorative materials-an SEM study[J]. Oral Rehabil, 2007,34(1):68-76. |
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |