SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.46 número6Preditores para o câncer oral no BrasilA prótese parcial removível acrílica na atenção primária: experiência e satisfação dos cirurgiões dentistas índice de autoresíndice de assuntospesquisa de artigos
Home Pagelista alfabética de periódicos  

Serviços Personalizados

Journal

Artigo

Indicadores

Links relacionados

Compartilhar


Revista de Odontologia da UNESP

versão On-line ISSN 1807-2577

Resumo

ALMEIDA, Jéssika Raíssa Medeiros de et al. Evaluation of roughness, hardness, and surface of ionomer glass cements after submission to different systems of finishing and polishing. Rev. odontol. UNESP [online]. 2017, vol.46, n.6, pp.330-335.  Epub 07-Dez-2017. ISSN 1807-2577.  http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1807-2577.07217.

Introduction

The roughness of glass ionomer cement (GIC) is a limitation that interferes with its mechanical and aesthetic performance, and it is necessary to use appropriate finishing and polishing procedures in restorations produced with this material.

Objective

To evaluate the effect of different finishing and polishing systems on roughness, hardness and surface of restorations performed with two types of GIC.

Material and method

100 specimens were made and divided into 10 groups, according to the type of GIC (conventional and resin modified GIC) and the finishing and polishing system used (C (Control) - Mylar strip; PD - diamond burs; DA - abrasive disks; PE - Enhance system; BM - carbide burs). After 7 days in distilled water, the specimens were evaluated by Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) and submitted to surface roughness and Vickers microhardness tests. Statistical analysis was performed by two-way ANOVA and Tukey post-test.

Result

SEM analysis demonstrated a smoother surface in BM group in both types of GIC. Regarding roughness, a statistically significant difference (p <0.05) was observed between some groups of conventional GIC, but there was no difference between GIC types. Regarding hardness, conventional GIC showed better results than resin-modified GIC; Concerning to finishing and polishing materials factor, there was no statistically significant difference, regardless of the type of GIC.

Conclusion

BM groups presented better results on SEM; The type of GIC did not influence the roughness values; The type of polishing did not influence the hardness.

Palavras-chave : Glass ionomer cements; microscopy, electron, scanning; hardness tests; surface properties.

        · resumo em Português     · texto em Português     · Português ( pdf )