THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT INSTRUMENT LUBRICANTS ON SURFACE MICROHARDNESS OF A MICROHYBRID RESIN COMPOSITE
[ X ]
Tarih
2021
Dergi Başlığı
Dergi ISSN
Cilt Başlığı
Yayıncı
Erişim Hakkı
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Özet
Background and Aim: This study aimed to evaluate the\reffects of different instrument lubricants on the surface\rmicrohardness of a resin composite.\rMaterial and Method: A total of 180 disk-shaped specimens\rof a resin composite (Filtek Z250; 3M-ESPE) were prepared in\rplastic molds and randomly divided into six groups according\rto the lubricants tested (n= 30)—group 1: control (no\rlubricant was used); group 2: ethanol; group 3: etch-and-rinse\radhesive (Adper Single Bond 2; 3M-ESPE); group 4: self-etch\radhesive (Clearfil SE Bond/the use of adhesive bottle only);\rgroup 5: universal adhesive (G-Premio Bond; GC); and group\r6: Bisco modeling resin. The Vickers hardness number was\rassessed using a microhardness tester. Following the baseline\rmeasurements, finishing/polishing procedures were performed,\rand microhardness was remeasured. The data gathered were\rstatistically analyzed (p< 0.05).\rResults: There was a statistically significant difference\rbetween the control and lubricant groups (p< 0.05). Although\rfinishing/polishing procedures improved the microhardness\rvalues in all the groups, a significant difference was found\rbetween the control and lubricant groups, except for the\rethanol group (p< 0.05).\rConclusion: Instrument lubricants changed the surface\rmicrohardness of the resin composite tested.
Açıklama
Anahtar Kelimeler
Diş Hekimliği, İstatistik ve Olasılık
Kaynak
Clinical Dentistry and Research
WoS Q Değeri
Scopus Q Değeri
Cilt
45
Sayı
1
