Compressive strength of glass ionomer and composite resin. In vitro study
Objective: To assess compressive strength of glass ionomer and composite resin restorations in premolar class I cavities. Material and methods: In vitro experimental study to assess compressive strength of two types of stomatological restoration materials, using as object of study 52 bi-radicular pr...
| Autores: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2017 |
| País: | México |
| Institución: | UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL AUTÓNOMA DE MÉXICO |
| Repositorio: | Revista Odontológica Mexicana |
| Idioma: | español |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/60474 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://revistas.unam.mx/index.php/rom/article/view/60474 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | (MeSH) resin glass ionomer restoration materials rheological tests. |
| Sumario: | Objective: To assess compressive strength of glass ionomer and composite resin restorations in premolar class I cavities. Material and methods: In vitro experimental study to assess compressive strength of two types of stomatological restoration materials, using as object of study 52 bi-radicular premolars. Samples were distributed into four groups with different characteristics such as restorative material and cavity depth (2-4 mm). Glass ionomer and composite resins were the used restorative materials. Grouped samples were subjected to a compressive vertical force using a EZ-S SHIMADZU texturometer, until achieving the material’s fracture. Obtained data were subjected to the Shapiro-Wilk test in order to assess data normalcy, null hypothesis was rejected. Total data analysis was conducted with t-Student test for independent samples. Results: Data obtained after assessing superficial hardness of different restorative materials showed the existence of statistical differences which favored composite resin when compared to glass ionomer at both depths (p = 6.908 × 10-11 and p =0.000). In intra-group comparison, a signifi cant different was found between both groups (resin and glass ionomer) at different depths (p = 0.000155887 and p = 0.00257443). Conclusion: Assessment of 4 mm tooth cavities restored with Tetric N-Ceram resin revealed greater hardness than those accomplished with Vitremer® resin at 2 and 4 mm and with the same resin at 2 mm depth. |
|---|