Physical Properties, Film Thickness, and Bond Strengths of Resin‐Modified Glass Ionomer Cements According to Their Delivery Method

Purpose To determine the effect of changing the dispensing or mixing method of resin‐modified glass ionomer (RMGI) cements on their water sorption, solubility, film thickness, and shear bond strength. Materials and Methods Disc‐shaped specimens of RMGI cements (RelyX: Luting [handmix], Luting Plus [clicker‐handmix], Luting Plus [automix], GC: Fuji PLUS [capsule‐automix], FujiCEM 2 [automix], [n = 10]) were prepared according to ISO standard 4049 for water sorption and solubility tests. Furthermore, the percentage of mass change, percentage of solubility, and percentage of water absorbed was also determined. Film thickness was measured according to ISO standard 9917‐2; the mean of 5 measurements for each cement was calculated. Shear bond strength for each cement was determined according to ISO standard 29022 before and after thermocycling at 20,000 cycles, temperatures 5 to 55°C with a 15‐second dwell time (n = 10/subgroup). Two‐ and one‐way ANOVA were used to analyze data for statistical significance (p < 0.05). Results Water sorptions of the RMGI cements were in close range (214‐250 μg/mm3) with no statistical differences between counterparts (p > 0.05). RelyX Luting Plus (clicker‐handmix) displayed lower solubility than its handmix and automix counterparts (p < 0.05). Film thickness of RelyX cements was significantly different (p < 0.05). RelyX Luting Plus (automix) had the lowest film thickness (19 μm) compared to its handmix (48 μm) and clicker‐handmix (117 μm) counterparts (p < 0.05). GC Fuji PLUS (capsule‐automix, 22 μm) was significantly lower than the automix version (GC FujiCEM 2, 127 μm) (p < 0.05). Shear bond strength of RelyX Luting Plus (automix) was significantly lower than its handmix and clicker‐handmix versions (p < 0.05). GC Fuji PLUS (capsule‐automix) was significantly higher than GC FujiCEM 2 (automix) (p < 0.05). The binary interaction of the two independent variables (dispensing/mixing method and thermocycling) was significant for the shear bond strengths of the GC cements only (p < 0.05). Conclusions Change in the dispensing/mixing method of RMGI cement from the same brand may have an effect on its physical properties, in addition to its film thickness and shear bond strength. Newer, easier, and faster cement delivery systems are not necessarily better. Clinical outcomes of these differences are yet to be confirmed.