4.6 Article

Effect of Nano-Filled Protective Coating and Different pH Enviroment on Wear Resistance of New Glass Hybrid Restorative Material

Journal

MATERIALS
Volume 14, Issue 4, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ma14040755

Keywords

glass ionomer; wear resistance; acid load; artificial saliva

Funding

  1. Croatian Science Foundation
  2. Investigation and development of new micro and nanostructure bioactive materials in dental medicine BIODENTMED [IP-2018-01-1719]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Equia Forte HT Fil exhibited higher wear resistance compared to Fuji IX GP, with or without coating, showing good performance in all storage conditions. There was no significant difference in wear resistance between samples stored in saliva and distilled water.
The purpose of the study was to determine the wear rate of Equia Forte HT Fil with Equia Forte Coat or without coating and compare it with Fuji IX GP high-viscosity glass ionomer cement (GIC) in conditions with acid load or at neutral pH. The samples were stored for 7 days: (1) in artificial saliva, (2) in artificial saliva and cyclically exposed to low pH, and (3) in distilled water and cyclically exposed to low pH. Wear was determined by measuring the difference in mass before and after brushing in an abrasion testing device. The wear of Fuji IX GP was significantly higher than that of Equia Forte HT Fil with or without coating (p = 0.000). The difference between Equia Forte HT Fil with and without Coat was not statistically significant (p < 0.803). The differences in wear resistance between samples stored in saliva and in distilled water were not significant (p = 0.588). Periodic exposure to the low pH solution significantly affected the wear resistance of all materials (p = 0.000). Equia Forte HT Fil was more resistant to wear than Fuji IX GP in all storage conditions. A resinous coat did not significantly increase wear resistance.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available