SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.31 número6Perfil de los pacientes rehabilitados por medio de prótesis atendidos en servicio público de salud en Ribeirão Preto, BrasilCambios tisulares y celulares por tabaquismo en mucosa bucal clínicamente sana: estudio clínico transversal índice de autoresíndice de materiabúsqueda de artículos
Home Pagelista alfabética de revistas  

Servicios Personalizados

Revista

Articulo

Indicadores

Links relacionados

  • En proceso de indezaciónCitado por Google
  • No hay articulos similaresSimilares en SciELO
  • En proceso de indezaciónSimilares en Google

Compartir


Avances en Odontoestomatología

versión On-line ISSN 2340-3152versión impresa ISSN 0213-1285

Resumen

TARON DUNOYER, A. et al. Comparison of surface hardness of different types of restoratives materials in premolars birradiculares, a in vitro study. Av Odontoestomatol [online]. 2015, vol.31, n.6, pp.355-361. ISSN 2340-3152.  https://dx.doi.org/10.4321/S0213-12852015000600003.

Objective: To evaluate and compare the surface hardness on restorations with glass ionomer and composite resin in Class I cavities according to Black in birradiculares premolars. Methods: Descriptive, comparative In Vitro study, in which the hardness of two types of restorative materials was measured was performed in cavities class I at two different depths designed in 32 birradiculares premolars, which were divided into 4 groups with different including features, either by the restorative material (glass ionomer, composite resin) or the depth of the cavity (2-4 mm), all specimens from each group were subjected to a vertical force through the texturometer monitored to generate the fracture of the material. To assess normal data obtained were subjected to the test Shapiro Wilk to reject the null hypothesis, while the total data analysis was performed using Student's t-test for independent samples. Results: Evaluated the hardness of the resin at 2 and 4 mm and the glass ionomer to the same depths, showing a statistical difference in favor of the composite resin Vs glass ionomer both depths (p=0.000001445 p=2.99E-9) and intragroup comparison showing only significant difference between the two groups at different depths resin (p=0.016). Conclusion: Of the materials tested in this comparative hardness study, the dental organs with cavities 4 mm depth were restored with Tetric N-Ceram have greater hardness than Vitremer 2 and 4 mm and the same resin to 2 mm depth.

Palabras clave : Resin; glass ionomer; restorative materials; rheological tests.

        · resumen en Español     · texto en Español     · Español ( pdf )

 

Creative Commons License Todo el contenido de esta revista, excepto dónde está identificado, está bajo una Licencia Creative Commons