You are in the accessibility menu

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://acervodigital.unesp.br/handle/11449/16629
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorTakeuchi, CYG-
dc.contributor.authorFlores, VHO-
dc.contributor.authorDibb, RGP-
dc.contributor.authorPanzeri, H.-
dc.contributor.authorLara, EHG-
dc.contributor.authorDinelli, W.-
dc.date.accessioned2014-05-20T13:46:53Z-
dc.date.accessioned2016-10-25T17:00:27Z-
dc.date.available2014-05-20T13:46:53Z-
dc.date.available2016-10-25T17:00:27Z-
dc.date.issued2003-05-01-
dc.identifier.citationOperative Dentistry. Indianapolis: Operative Dentistry Inc., v. 28, n. 3, p. 281-286, 2003.-
dc.identifier.issn0361-7734-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11449/16629-
dc.identifier.urihttp://acervodigital.unesp.br/handle/11449/16629-
dc.description.abstractThis study assessed the in vitro influence of surface sealing on the surface roughness of a posterior resin composite before and after tooth-brushing. Thirty. specimens (13 nun diameter x 1 mm high) were fabricated from Filtek-P60 resin composite and randomly assigned to three groups (n=10): a non-sealed control and two groups sealed with one of the tested materials-a surface-penetrating sealant (Protect-it!-PI) and a one bottle adhesive system (Single Bond-SB). The samples were subjected to a surface roughness reading to determine the initial roughness, then submitted to simulated toothbrushing with 35,600 cycles for 100 minutes. Specimens were then cleaned and a post-abrasion surface roughness reading accomplished. Means (pm), recorded before (B) and after (A) toothbrushing, and standard deviations were: Control-(B): 0.032 (+/-0.005), (A): 0.054 (+/-0.005); PI-(B): 0.034 (+/-0.005), (A): 0.060 (+/-0.034); SB (B): 0.031 (+/-0.004), (A): 0.047 (+/-0.007). Data were tabulated and submitted to two-way ANOVA. No statistically significant difference was observed when the control and experimental groups were compared. However, a significant difference (p<0.05) was found between the measurements performed before and after toothbrushing. Based on these results, it may be concluded that using either a surface penetrating sealant or a one bottle adhesive system did not provide the optimization of superficial integrity. The use of a dentifrice and toothbrush resulted in significant alterations to the surface smoothness of the resin composite.en
dc.format.extent281-286-
dc.language.isoeng-
dc.publisherOperative Dentistry Inc-
dc.sourceWeb of Science-
dc.titleAssessing the surface roughness of a posterior resin composite: effect of surface sealingen
dc.typeoutro-
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)-
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade de São Paulo (USP)-
dc.description.affiliationSão Paulo State Univ, UNESP, Araraquara Dent Sch, Dept Restorat Dent, São Paulo, Brazil-
dc.description.affiliationUniv São Paulo, Ribeirao Preto Dent Sch, Dept Operat Dent, São Paulo, Brazil-
dc.description.affiliationUniv São Paulo, Ribeirao Preto Dent Sch, Dept Dent Mat & Prosthodont, São Paulo, Brazil-
dc.description.affiliationUniv São Paulo, Sch Pharmaceut Sci, Dept Pharmaceut Sci, São Paulo, Brazil-
dc.description.affiliationUnespSão Paulo State Univ, UNESP, Araraquara Dent Sch, Dept Restorat Dent, São Paulo, Brazil-
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000182553800009-
dc.rights.accessRightsAcesso restrito-
dc.relation.ispartofOperative Dentistry-
Appears in Collections:Artigos, TCCs, Teses e Dissertações da Unesp

There are no files associated with this item.
 

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.