首页> 外文期刊>Dental materials >Influence of the antagonist material on the wear of different composites using two different wear simulation methods
【24h】

Influence of the antagonist material on the wear of different composites using two different wear simulation methods

机译:使用两种不同的磨损模拟方法,拮抗材料对不同复合材料的磨损的影响

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Objectives. The aim of the study was to evaluate two ceramic materials as possible substitutes for enamel using two wear simulation methods, and to compare both methods with regard to the wear results for different materials. Methods. Flat specimens (OHSU n = 6, Ivoclar n = 8) of one compomer and three composite materials (Dyract AP, Tetric Ceram, Z250, experimental composite) were fabricated and subjected to wear using two different wear testing methods and two pressable ceramic materials as stylus (Empress, experimental ceramic). For the OHSU method, enamel styli of the same dimensions as the ceramic stylus were fabricated additionally. Both wear testing methods differ with regard to loading force, lateral movement of stylus, stylus dimension, number of cycles, thermo-cycling and abrasive medium. In the OHSU method, the wear facets (mean vertical loss) were measured using a contact profilometer, while in the Ivoclar method (maximal vertical loss) a laser scanner was used for this purpose. Additionally, the vertical loss of the ceramic stylus was quantified for the Ivoclar method. The results obtained from each method were compared by ANOVA and Tukey's test (p < 0.05). To compare both wear methods, the log-transformed data were used to establish relative ranks between material/stylus combinations and assessed by applying the Pearson correlation coefficient. Results. The experimental ceramic material generated significantly less wear in Tetric Ceram and Z250 specimens compared to the Empress stylus in the Ivoclar method, whereas with the OHSU method, no difference between the two ceramic antagonists was found with regard to abrasion or attrition. The wear generated by the enamel stylus was not statistically different from that generated by the other two ceramic materials in the OHSU method. With the Ivoclar method, wear of the ceramic stylus was only statistically different when in contact with Tetric Ceram. There was a close correlation between the attrition wear of the OHSU and the wear of the Ivoclar method (Pearson coefficient 0.83, p=0.01). Significance: Pressable ceramic materials can be used as a substitute for enamel in wear testing machines. However, material ranking may be affected by the type of ceramic material chosen. The attrition wear of the OHSU method was comparable with the wear generated with the Ivoclar method.
机译:目标。研究的目的是使用两种磨损模拟方法评估两种陶瓷材料作为搪瓷的可能替代品,并比较两种方法在不同材料上的磨损结果。方法。制作了一种复合物和三种复合材料(Dyract AP,Tetric Ceram,Z250,实验性复合材料)的扁平样品(OHSU n = 6,Ivoclar n = 8),并使用两种不同的磨损测试方法和两种可压制陶瓷材料对其进行了磨损手写笔(Empress,实验陶瓷)。对于OHSU方法,还制造了与陶瓷笔相同尺寸的搪瓷笔。两种磨损测试方法在加载力,测针的横向运动,测针尺寸,循环次数,热循环和研磨介质方面都不同。在OHSU方法中,使用接触轮廓仪测量磨损面(平均垂直损耗),而在Ivoclar方法(最大垂直损耗)中,为此使用激光扫描仪。另外,对于Ivoclar方法,陶瓷笔的垂直损耗被量化。通过方差分析和Tukey检验比较从每种方法获得的结果(p <0.05)。为了比较两种磨损方法,将对数转换后的数据用于建立材料/手写笔组合之间的相对等级,并通过应用Pearson相关系数进行评估。结果。与Ivoclar方法中的女皇手写笔相比,实验陶瓷材料在Tetric Ceram和Z250标本中产生的磨损要少得多,而使用OHSU方法时,两种陶瓷拮抗剂在磨损或磨损方面没有发现差异。珐琅笔产生的磨损与OHSU方法中其他两种陶瓷材料产生的磨损在统计学上没有差异。使用Ivoclar方法时,与Tetric Ceram接触时,陶瓷笔的磨损仅在统计上不同。 OHSU的磨损与Ivoclar方法的磨损之间有着密切的相关性(皮尔森系数0.83,p = 0.01)。启示:可压陶瓷材料可以在磨损试验机中替代搪瓷。但是,材料等级可能会受到所选陶瓷材料类型的影响。 OHSU方法的磨损与Ivoclar方法产生的磨损相当。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号