Effect of G‐Coat Plus on the mechanical properties of glass‐ionomer cements

Background Although various mechanical properties of tooth‐coloured materials have been described, little data have been published on the effect of ageing and G‐Coat Plus on the hardness and strength of the glass‐ionomer cements (GICs). Methods Specimens were prepared from one polyacid‐modified resi...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Australian dental journal 2013-12, Vol.58 (4), p.448-453
Hauptverfasser: Bagheri, R, Taha, NA, Azar, MR, Burrow, MF
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 453
container_issue 4
container_start_page 448
container_title Australian dental journal
container_volume 58
creator Bagheri, R
Taha, NA
Azar, MR
Burrow, MF
description Background Although various mechanical properties of tooth‐coloured materials have been described, little data have been published on the effect of ageing and G‐Coat Plus on the hardness and strength of the glass‐ionomer cements (GICs). Methods Specimens were prepared from one polyacid‐modified resin composite (PAMRC; Freedom, SDI), one resin‐modified glass‐ionomer cement; (RM‐GIC; Fuji II LC, GC), and one conventional glass‐ionomer cement; (GIC; Fuji IX, GC). GIC and RM‐GIC were tested both with and without applying G‐Coat Plus (GC). Specimens were conditioned in 37 °C distilled water for either 24 hours, four and eight weeks. Half the specimens were subjected to a shear punch test using a universal testing machine; the remaining half was subjected to Vickers Hardness test. Results Data analysis showed that the hardness and shear punch values were material dependent. The hardness and shear punch of the PAMRC was the highest and GIC the lowest. Applying the G‐Coat Plus was associated with a significant decrease in the hardness of the materials but increase in the shear punch strength after four and eight weeks. Conclusions The mechanical properties of the restorative materials were affected by applying G‐Coat Plus and distilled water immersion over time. The PAMRC was significantly stronger and harder than the RM‐GIC or GIC.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/adj.12122
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1467063139</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1467063139</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3252-2f949ed33cad8419dbb6da9b56b61ed253dc137725dd6936a22c0eec0aaa1c2f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kLtOwzAUQC0EoqUw8APIIwxp_cjLY1VKAVUqA8yWY9_QVElc4kSoG5_AN_IluKSwcZe7nHt0dRC6pGRM_UyU2Ywpo4wdoSFNeRgkKRXHaEhIGAUkZHSAzpzbEMJCnpBTNPCbEUHoEK3meQ66xTbHi6-Pz5lVLX4qO4dtjds14Ar0WtWFViXeNnYLTVuA29OvpXLOXxS2thU0WEMFdevO0UmuSgcXhz1CL3fz59l9sFwtHmbTZaA5i1jAchEKMJxrZdKQCpNlsVEii-IspmBYxI2mPElYZEwseKwY0wRAE6UU1SznI3Tde_1Xbx24VlaF01CWqgbbOUnDOCExp1x49KZHdWOdayCX26aoVLOTlMh9P-n7yZ9-nr06aLusAvNH_gbzwKQH3osSdv-b5PT2sVd-A663eyw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1467063139</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Effect of G‐Coat Plus on the mechanical properties of glass‐ionomer cements</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Journals</source><source>Wiley Free Content</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>Bagheri, R ; Taha, NA ; Azar, MR ; Burrow, MF</creator><creatorcontrib>Bagheri, R ; Taha, NA ; Azar, MR ; Burrow, MF</creatorcontrib><description>Background Although various mechanical properties of tooth‐coloured materials have been described, little data have been published on the effect of ageing and G‐Coat Plus on the hardness and strength of the glass‐ionomer cements (GICs). Methods Specimens were prepared from one polyacid‐modified resin composite (PAMRC; Freedom, SDI), one resin‐modified glass‐ionomer cement; (RM‐GIC; Fuji II LC, GC), and one conventional glass‐ionomer cement; (GIC; Fuji IX, GC). GIC and RM‐GIC were tested both with and without applying G‐Coat Plus (GC). Specimens were conditioned in 37 °C distilled water for either 24 hours, four and eight weeks. Half the specimens were subjected to a shear punch test using a universal testing machine; the remaining half was subjected to Vickers Hardness test. Results Data analysis showed that the hardness and shear punch values were material dependent. The hardness and shear punch of the PAMRC was the highest and GIC the lowest. Applying the G‐Coat Plus was associated with a significant decrease in the hardness of the materials but increase in the shear punch strength after four and eight weeks. Conclusions The mechanical properties of the restorative materials were affected by applying G‐Coat Plus and distilled water immersion over time. The PAMRC was significantly stronger and harder than the RM‐GIC or GIC.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0045-0421</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1834-7819</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/adj.12122</identifier><identifier>PMID: 24320901</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Australia</publisher><subject>Compomers ; Dental Materials ; Dentistry ; Glass Ionomer Cements ; G‐Coat Plus ; Hardness ; Humans ; Immersion ; Materials Testing - methods ; mechanical properties ; Resins, Synthetic ; Shear Strength ; Time Factors ; Water</subject><ispartof>Australian dental journal, 2013-12, Vol.58 (4), p.448-453</ispartof><rights>2013 Australian Dental Association</rights><rights>2013 Australian Dental Association.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3252-2f949ed33cad8419dbb6da9b56b61ed253dc137725dd6936a22c0eec0aaa1c2f3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3252-2f949ed33cad8419dbb6da9b56b61ed253dc137725dd6936a22c0eec0aaa1c2f3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fadj.12122$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fadj.12122$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,1433,27924,27925,45574,45575,46409,46833</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24320901$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bagheri, R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Taha, NA</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Azar, MR</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Burrow, MF</creatorcontrib><title>Effect of G‐Coat Plus on the mechanical properties of glass‐ionomer cements</title><title>Australian dental journal</title><addtitle>Aust Dent J</addtitle><description>Background Although various mechanical properties of tooth‐coloured materials have been described, little data have been published on the effect of ageing and G‐Coat Plus on the hardness and strength of the glass‐ionomer cements (GICs). Methods Specimens were prepared from one polyacid‐modified resin composite (PAMRC; Freedom, SDI), one resin‐modified glass‐ionomer cement; (RM‐GIC; Fuji II LC, GC), and one conventional glass‐ionomer cement; (GIC; Fuji IX, GC). GIC and RM‐GIC were tested both with and without applying G‐Coat Plus (GC). Specimens were conditioned in 37 °C distilled water for either 24 hours, four and eight weeks. Half the specimens were subjected to a shear punch test using a universal testing machine; the remaining half was subjected to Vickers Hardness test. Results Data analysis showed that the hardness and shear punch values were material dependent. The hardness and shear punch of the PAMRC was the highest and GIC the lowest. Applying the G‐Coat Plus was associated with a significant decrease in the hardness of the materials but increase in the shear punch strength after four and eight weeks. Conclusions The mechanical properties of the restorative materials were affected by applying G‐Coat Plus and distilled water immersion over time. The PAMRC was significantly stronger and harder than the RM‐GIC or GIC.</description><subject>Compomers</subject><subject>Dental Materials</subject><subject>Dentistry</subject><subject>Glass Ionomer Cements</subject><subject>G‐Coat Plus</subject><subject>Hardness</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Immersion</subject><subject>Materials Testing - methods</subject><subject>mechanical properties</subject><subject>Resins, Synthetic</subject><subject>Shear Strength</subject><subject>Time Factors</subject><subject>Water</subject><issn>0045-0421</issn><issn>1834-7819</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2013</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kLtOwzAUQC0EoqUw8APIIwxp_cjLY1VKAVUqA8yWY9_QVElc4kSoG5_AN_IluKSwcZe7nHt0dRC6pGRM_UyU2Ywpo4wdoSFNeRgkKRXHaEhIGAUkZHSAzpzbEMJCnpBTNPCbEUHoEK3meQ66xTbHi6-Pz5lVLX4qO4dtjds14Ar0WtWFViXeNnYLTVuA29OvpXLOXxS2thU0WEMFdevO0UmuSgcXhz1CL3fz59l9sFwtHmbTZaA5i1jAchEKMJxrZdKQCpNlsVEii-IspmBYxI2mPElYZEwseKwY0wRAE6UU1SznI3Tde_1Xbx24VlaF01CWqgbbOUnDOCExp1x49KZHdWOdayCX26aoVLOTlMh9P-n7yZ9-nr06aLusAvNH_gbzwKQH3osSdv-b5PT2sVd-A663eyw</recordid><startdate>201312</startdate><enddate>201312</enddate><creator>Bagheri, R</creator><creator>Taha, NA</creator><creator>Azar, MR</creator><creator>Burrow, MF</creator><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201312</creationdate><title>Effect of G‐Coat Plus on the mechanical properties of glass‐ionomer cements</title><author>Bagheri, R ; Taha, NA ; Azar, MR ; Burrow, MF</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3252-2f949ed33cad8419dbb6da9b56b61ed253dc137725dd6936a22c0eec0aaa1c2f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2013</creationdate><topic>Compomers</topic><topic>Dental Materials</topic><topic>Dentistry</topic><topic>Glass Ionomer Cements</topic><topic>G‐Coat Plus</topic><topic>Hardness</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Immersion</topic><topic>Materials Testing - methods</topic><topic>mechanical properties</topic><topic>Resins, Synthetic</topic><topic>Shear Strength</topic><topic>Time Factors</topic><topic>Water</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bagheri, R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Taha, NA</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Azar, MR</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Burrow, MF</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Australian dental journal</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bagheri, R</au><au>Taha, NA</au><au>Azar, MR</au><au>Burrow, MF</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Effect of G‐Coat Plus on the mechanical properties of glass‐ionomer cements</atitle><jtitle>Australian dental journal</jtitle><addtitle>Aust Dent J</addtitle><date>2013-12</date><risdate>2013</risdate><volume>58</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>448</spage><epage>453</epage><pages>448-453</pages><issn>0045-0421</issn><eissn>1834-7819</eissn><abstract>Background Although various mechanical properties of tooth‐coloured materials have been described, little data have been published on the effect of ageing and G‐Coat Plus on the hardness and strength of the glass‐ionomer cements (GICs). Methods Specimens were prepared from one polyacid‐modified resin composite (PAMRC; Freedom, SDI), one resin‐modified glass‐ionomer cement; (RM‐GIC; Fuji II LC, GC), and one conventional glass‐ionomer cement; (GIC; Fuji IX, GC). GIC and RM‐GIC were tested both with and without applying G‐Coat Plus (GC). Specimens were conditioned in 37 °C distilled water for either 24 hours, four and eight weeks. Half the specimens were subjected to a shear punch test using a universal testing machine; the remaining half was subjected to Vickers Hardness test. Results Data analysis showed that the hardness and shear punch values were material dependent. The hardness and shear punch of the PAMRC was the highest and GIC the lowest. Applying the G‐Coat Plus was associated with a significant decrease in the hardness of the materials but increase in the shear punch strength after four and eight weeks. Conclusions The mechanical properties of the restorative materials were affected by applying G‐Coat Plus and distilled water immersion over time. The PAMRC was significantly stronger and harder than the RM‐GIC or GIC.</abstract><cop>Australia</cop><pmid>24320901</pmid><doi>10.1111/adj.12122</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0045-0421
ispartof Australian dental journal, 2013-12, Vol.58 (4), p.448-453
issn 0045-0421
1834-7819
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1467063139
source MEDLINE; Wiley Journals; Wiley Free Content; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals
subjects Compomers
Dental Materials
Dentistry
Glass Ionomer Cements
G‐Coat Plus
Hardness
Humans
Immersion
Materials Testing - methods
mechanical properties
Resins, Synthetic
Shear Strength
Time Factors
Water
title Effect of G‐Coat Plus on the mechanical properties of glass‐ionomer cements
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-05T09%3A21%3A27IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Effect%20of%20G%E2%80%90Coat%20Plus%20on%20the%20mechanical%20properties%20of%20glass%E2%80%90ionomer%20cements&rft.jtitle=Australian%20dental%20journal&rft.au=Bagheri,%20R&rft.date=2013-12&rft.volume=58&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=448&rft.epage=453&rft.pages=448-453&rft.issn=0045-0421&rft.eissn=1834-7819&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/adj.12122&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1467063139%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1467063139&rft_id=info:pmid/24320901&rfr_iscdi=true