• Menu
  • Skip to right header navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Biomimetic Dentistry

Less drilling! More healing!

  • Home
  • Literature
    • Thermo Cure
    • Mineralisation
    • Toxicity
    • Biocompatibility
    • Clinical Experiments
    • Compressive Strength and Flexual Strength
    • Core Builds Ups
    • Test Protocols
    • Coating
    • Sealants
  • How To Make
  • Videos
  • News
  • About Us
  • Contact
  • Calendar
  • Home
  • Literature
    • Thermo Cure
    • Mineralisation
    • Toxicity
    • Biocompatibility
    • Clinical Experiments
    • Compressive Strength and Flexual Strength
    • Core Builds Ups
    • Test Protocols
    • Coating
    • Sealants
  • How To Make
  • Videos
  • News
  • About Us
  • Contact
  • Calendar

The crushing truth about glass ionomer restoratives: Exposing the standard of the standard

5 December 2011 //  by Biodentistry.eu//  Leave a Comment

Fleming GJ, Dowling AH, Addison O.

Source

Materials Science Unit, Division of Oral Biosciences, Dublin Dental University Hospital, Trinity College Dublin, Lincoln Place, Dublin 2, Ireland.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES:

The compressive fracture strength (CFS) test is the only strength test for glass ionomers (GIs) in ISO 9917-1: 2003. The CFS test was the subject of much controversy in 1990 and has been challenged over its appropriateness and reproducibility and the study aimed to revisit the suitability of the CFS test for GIs.

METHODS:

Groups of 20 (four batches of n=5) cylinders (6.0±0.1mm height, 4.0±0.1mm diameter) of three encapsulated GIs were prepared for CFS testing using two mechanical mixing regimes and two operators. The CFS data for each GI restorative were pooled, three-, two- and one-way analyses of variance (ANOVAs) were conducted (p=0.05) for operator, mixing regime and batch to assess reliability. The data was also analysed according to ISO 9917-1: 2003.

RESULTS:

The three-way ANOVAs showed a significant interaction of operator×mixing regime×batch (p<0.017) for two of the three encapsulated GIs. However, no significant effects of operator×mixing regime (p>0.042), operator×batch (p>0.332), mixing regime×batch (p>0.056), operator (p>0.094), mixing regime (p>0.118) or batch (p>0.054) were evident. When examined in batches of five (or ten where appropriate) as specified in ISO 9917-1: 2003, inter- and intra-operator variability were evident.

CONCLUSIONS:

The use of batch-censoring in accordance with ISO 9917-1: 2003 is unsafe when the data scatter reflects a homogenous flaw distribution as it misidentifies operative variability. Despite demonstrating that the CFS test can be performed reliably, the validity of the CFS test for GIs remains under scrutiny.

 

Copyright © 2011. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
PMID: 22178631 [PubMed – as supplied by publisher] 1.         J Dent. 2011 Dec 9. [Epub ahead of print]

Category: Test Protocols

Previous Post: « Microhardness and chemical analysis of high-viscous glass-ionomer cement after 10 years of clinical service as ART restorations
Next Post: Effect of three different core materials on the fracture resistance of endodontically treated deciduous mandibular second molars: an in vitro study »

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Primary Sidebar

Upload

Click here to upload a picture

Mineralisation In Vivo

Latest News

  • Effects of storage media on the flexural strength of GIC 5 June 2020
  • Biomimetic Dentistry in Indonesia 18 January 2020
  • Cervical leasions Class V 17 January 2020
  • Cell physiological effects of glass ionomer cements on fibroblast cells. 5 August 2019
  • A randomized controlled 10 years follow up of a glass ionomer restorative material in class I and class II cavities 5 July 2019

About

Biomimetic Dentistry is a new way of dentistry which takes advantages of the natural mineralization processes in the mouth without using harmfully products.

Copyright © 2022 · Powered by Ter Hoeven Services