Emission Characteristics and Effect of Battery Drain in "Budget" Curing Lights

Recently, "budget" dental light-emitting diode (LED)-based light-curing units (LCUs) have become available over the Internet. These LCUs claim equal features and performance compared to LCUs from major manufacturers, but at a lower cost. This study examined radiant power, spectral emission...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Operative dentistry 2016-07, Vol.41 (4), p.397-408
Hauptverfasser: AlShaafi, M M, Harlow, J E, Price, H L, Rueggeberg, F A, Labrie, D, AlQahtani, M Q, Price, R B
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 408
container_issue 4
container_start_page 397
container_title Operative dentistry
container_volume 41
creator AlShaafi, M M
Harlow, J E
Price, H L
Rueggeberg, F A
Labrie, D
AlQahtani, M Q
Price, R B
description Recently, "budget" dental light-emitting diode (LED)-based light-curing units (LCUs) have become available over the Internet. These LCUs claim equal features and performance compared to LCUs from major manufacturers, but at a lower cost. This study examined radiant power, spectral emission, beam irradiance profiles, effective emission ratios, and the ability of LCUs to provide sustained output values during the lifetime of a single, fully charged battery. Three examples of each budget LCU were purchased over the Internet (KY-L029A and KY-L036A, Foshan Keyuan Medical Equipment Co, and the Woodpecker LED.B, Guilin Woodpecker Medical Instrument Co). Major dental manufacturers provided three models: Elipar S10 and Paradigm (3M ESPE) and the Bluephase G2 (Ivoclar Vivadent). Radiant power emissions were measured using a laboratory-grade thermopile system, and the spectral emission was captured using a spectroradiometer system. Irradiance profiles at the tip end were measured using a modified laser beam profiler, and the proportion of optical tip area that delivered in excess of 400 mW/cm(2) (termed the effective emission ratio) was displayed using calibrated beam profile images. Emitted power was monitored over sequential exposures from each LCU starting at a fully charged battery state. The results indicated that there was less than a 100-mW/cm(2) difference between manufacturer-stated average tip end irradiance and the measured output. All the budget lights had smaller optical tip areas, and two demonstrated lower effective emission ratios than did the units from the major manufacturers. The budget lights showed discontinuous values of irradiance over their tip ends. One unit delivered extremely high output levels near the center of the light tip. Two of the budget lights were unable to maintain sustained and stable light output as the battery charge decreased with use, whereas those lights from the major manufacturers all provided a sustained light output for at least 100 exposures as well as visual and audible indications that the units required recharging.
doi_str_mv 10.2341/14-281-L
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1807278773</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1807278773</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c317t-2a1b5b95139cb52a96f85ed60c37e279341db2182f754070f339c5b22400c7a43</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpFkF1LwzAUhoMobk7BXyBhV95U89m0l67ODyh6o9chTZMu0rUzSS_27404FQ4cDufhhecF4BKjG0IZvsUsIwXO6iMwx5yX6cjpMZgjmuNMCMpm4CyED4QYZ5yfghnJc04QFnPwst66ENw4wGqjvNLReBei0wGqoYVra42OcLRwpWJ67eG9V26AaZarqe1MXMJq8m7oYO26TQzn4MSqPpiLw16A94f1W_WU1a-Pz9VdnWmKRcyIwg1vSo5pqRtOVJnbgps2R5oKQ0SZnNqG4IJYwRkSyNIE8oYQhpAWitEFuP7J3fnxczIhyqShTd-rwYxTkLhAgogiuf-j2o8heGPlzrut8nuJkfxuT2ImU3uyTujVIXVqtqb9A3_rol_nU2cr</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1807278773</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Emission Characteristics and Effect of Battery Drain in "Budget" Curing Lights</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Allen Press Journals</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>AlShaafi, M M ; Harlow, J E ; Price, H L ; Rueggeberg, F A ; Labrie, D ; AlQahtani, M Q ; Price, R B</creator><creatorcontrib>AlShaafi, M M ; Harlow, J E ; Price, H L ; Rueggeberg, F A ; Labrie, D ; AlQahtani, M Q ; Price, R B</creatorcontrib><description>Recently, "budget" dental light-emitting diode (LED)-based light-curing units (LCUs) have become available over the Internet. These LCUs claim equal features and performance compared to LCUs from major manufacturers, but at a lower cost. This study examined radiant power, spectral emission, beam irradiance profiles, effective emission ratios, and the ability of LCUs to provide sustained output values during the lifetime of a single, fully charged battery. Three examples of each budget LCU were purchased over the Internet (KY-L029A and KY-L036A, Foshan Keyuan Medical Equipment Co, and the Woodpecker LED.B, Guilin Woodpecker Medical Instrument Co). Major dental manufacturers provided three models: Elipar S10 and Paradigm (3M ESPE) and the Bluephase G2 (Ivoclar Vivadent). Radiant power emissions were measured using a laboratory-grade thermopile system, and the spectral emission was captured using a spectroradiometer system. Irradiance profiles at the tip end were measured using a modified laser beam profiler, and the proportion of optical tip area that delivered in excess of 400 mW/cm(2) (termed the effective emission ratio) was displayed using calibrated beam profile images. Emitted power was monitored over sequential exposures from each LCU starting at a fully charged battery state. The results indicated that there was less than a 100-mW/cm(2) difference between manufacturer-stated average tip end irradiance and the measured output. All the budget lights had smaller optical tip areas, and two demonstrated lower effective emission ratios than did the units from the major manufacturers. The budget lights showed discontinuous values of irradiance over their tip ends. One unit delivered extremely high output levels near the center of the light tip. Two of the budget lights were unable to maintain sustained and stable light output as the battery charge decreased with use, whereas those lights from the major manufacturers all provided a sustained light output for at least 100 exposures as well as visual and audible indications that the units required recharging.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0361-7734</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1559-2863</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.2341/14-281-L</identifier><identifier>PMID: 26652017</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States</publisher><subject>Composite Resins ; Curing Lights, Dental ; Dentistry ; Electric Power Supplies ; Materials Testing</subject><ispartof>Operative dentistry, 2016-07, Vol.41 (4), p.397-408</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c317t-2a1b5b95139cb52a96f85ed60c37e279341db2182f754070f339c5b22400c7a43</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c317t-2a1b5b95139cb52a96f85ed60c37e279341db2182f754070f339c5b22400c7a43</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26652017$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>AlShaafi, M M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Harlow, J E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Price, H L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rueggeberg, F A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Labrie, D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>AlQahtani, M Q</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Price, R B</creatorcontrib><title>Emission Characteristics and Effect of Battery Drain in "Budget" Curing Lights</title><title>Operative dentistry</title><addtitle>Oper Dent</addtitle><description>Recently, "budget" dental light-emitting diode (LED)-based light-curing units (LCUs) have become available over the Internet. These LCUs claim equal features and performance compared to LCUs from major manufacturers, but at a lower cost. This study examined radiant power, spectral emission, beam irradiance profiles, effective emission ratios, and the ability of LCUs to provide sustained output values during the lifetime of a single, fully charged battery. Three examples of each budget LCU were purchased over the Internet (KY-L029A and KY-L036A, Foshan Keyuan Medical Equipment Co, and the Woodpecker LED.B, Guilin Woodpecker Medical Instrument Co). Major dental manufacturers provided three models: Elipar S10 and Paradigm (3M ESPE) and the Bluephase G2 (Ivoclar Vivadent). Radiant power emissions were measured using a laboratory-grade thermopile system, and the spectral emission was captured using a spectroradiometer system. Irradiance profiles at the tip end were measured using a modified laser beam profiler, and the proportion of optical tip area that delivered in excess of 400 mW/cm(2) (termed the effective emission ratio) was displayed using calibrated beam profile images. Emitted power was monitored over sequential exposures from each LCU starting at a fully charged battery state. The results indicated that there was less than a 100-mW/cm(2) difference between manufacturer-stated average tip end irradiance and the measured output. All the budget lights had smaller optical tip areas, and two demonstrated lower effective emission ratios than did the units from the major manufacturers. The budget lights showed discontinuous values of irradiance over their tip ends. One unit delivered extremely high output levels near the center of the light tip. Two of the budget lights were unable to maintain sustained and stable light output as the battery charge decreased with use, whereas those lights from the major manufacturers all provided a sustained light output for at least 100 exposures as well as visual and audible indications that the units required recharging.</description><subject>Composite Resins</subject><subject>Curing Lights, Dental</subject><subject>Dentistry</subject><subject>Electric Power Supplies</subject><subject>Materials Testing</subject><issn>0361-7734</issn><issn>1559-2863</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpFkF1LwzAUhoMobk7BXyBhV95U89m0l67ODyh6o9chTZMu0rUzSS_27404FQ4cDufhhecF4BKjG0IZvsUsIwXO6iMwx5yX6cjpMZgjmuNMCMpm4CyED4QYZ5yfghnJc04QFnPwst66ENw4wGqjvNLReBei0wGqoYVra42OcLRwpWJ67eG9V26AaZarqe1MXMJq8m7oYO26TQzn4MSqPpiLw16A94f1W_WU1a-Pz9VdnWmKRcyIwg1vSo5pqRtOVJnbgps2R5oKQ0SZnNqG4IJYwRkSyNIE8oYQhpAWitEFuP7J3fnxczIhyqShTd-rwYxTkLhAgogiuf-j2o8heGPlzrut8nuJkfxuT2ImU3uyTujVIXVqtqb9A3_rol_nU2cr</recordid><startdate>201607</startdate><enddate>201607</enddate><creator>AlShaafi, M M</creator><creator>Harlow, J E</creator><creator>Price, H L</creator><creator>Rueggeberg, F A</creator><creator>Labrie, D</creator><creator>AlQahtani, M Q</creator><creator>Price, R B</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>201607</creationdate><title>Emission Characteristics and Effect of Battery Drain in "Budget" Curing Lights</title><author>AlShaafi, M M ; Harlow, J E ; Price, H L ; Rueggeberg, F A ; Labrie, D ; AlQahtani, M Q ; Price, R B</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c317t-2a1b5b95139cb52a96f85ed60c37e279341db2182f754070f339c5b22400c7a43</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Composite Resins</topic><topic>Curing Lights, Dental</topic><topic>Dentistry</topic><topic>Electric Power Supplies</topic><topic>Materials Testing</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>AlShaafi, M M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Harlow, J E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Price, H L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rueggeberg, F A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Labrie, D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>AlQahtani, M Q</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Price, R B</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>Operative dentistry</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>AlShaafi, M M</au><au>Harlow, J E</au><au>Price, H L</au><au>Rueggeberg, F A</au><au>Labrie, D</au><au>AlQahtani, M Q</au><au>Price, R B</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Emission Characteristics and Effect of Battery Drain in "Budget" Curing Lights</atitle><jtitle>Operative dentistry</jtitle><addtitle>Oper Dent</addtitle><date>2016-07</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>41</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>397</spage><epage>408</epage><pages>397-408</pages><issn>0361-7734</issn><eissn>1559-2863</eissn><abstract>Recently, "budget" dental light-emitting diode (LED)-based light-curing units (LCUs) have become available over the Internet. These LCUs claim equal features and performance compared to LCUs from major manufacturers, but at a lower cost. This study examined radiant power, spectral emission, beam irradiance profiles, effective emission ratios, and the ability of LCUs to provide sustained output values during the lifetime of a single, fully charged battery. Three examples of each budget LCU were purchased over the Internet (KY-L029A and KY-L036A, Foshan Keyuan Medical Equipment Co, and the Woodpecker LED.B, Guilin Woodpecker Medical Instrument Co). Major dental manufacturers provided three models: Elipar S10 and Paradigm (3M ESPE) and the Bluephase G2 (Ivoclar Vivadent). Radiant power emissions were measured using a laboratory-grade thermopile system, and the spectral emission was captured using a spectroradiometer system. Irradiance profiles at the tip end were measured using a modified laser beam profiler, and the proportion of optical tip area that delivered in excess of 400 mW/cm(2) (termed the effective emission ratio) was displayed using calibrated beam profile images. Emitted power was monitored over sequential exposures from each LCU starting at a fully charged battery state. The results indicated that there was less than a 100-mW/cm(2) difference between manufacturer-stated average tip end irradiance and the measured output. All the budget lights had smaller optical tip areas, and two demonstrated lower effective emission ratios than did the units from the major manufacturers. The budget lights showed discontinuous values of irradiance over their tip ends. One unit delivered extremely high output levels near the center of the light tip. Two of the budget lights were unable to maintain sustained and stable light output as the battery charge decreased with use, whereas those lights from the major manufacturers all provided a sustained light output for at least 100 exposures as well as visual and audible indications that the units required recharging.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pmid>26652017</pmid><doi>10.2341/14-281-L</doi><tpages>12</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0361-7734
ispartof Operative dentistry, 2016-07, Vol.41 (4), p.397-408
issn 0361-7734
1559-2863
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1807278773
source MEDLINE; Allen Press Journals; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects Composite Resins
Curing Lights, Dental
Dentistry
Electric Power Supplies
Materials Testing
title Emission Characteristics and Effect of Battery Drain in "Budget" Curing Lights
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-29T03%3A30%3A17IST&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=Emission%20Characteristics%20and%20Effect%20of%20Battery%20Drain%20in%20%22Budget%22%20Curing%20Lights&rft.jtitle=Operative%20dentistry&rft.au=AlShaafi,%20M%20M&rft.date=2016-07&rft.volume=41&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=397&rft.epage=408&rft.pages=397-408&rft.issn=0361-7734&rft.eissn=1559-2863&rft_id=info:doi/10.2341/14-281-L&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1807278773%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=1807278773&rft_id=info:pmid/26652017&rfr_iscdi=true