首页> 外文期刊>Brazilian Dental Journal >Accuracy of Irradiance and Power of Light-Curing Units Measured With Handheld or Laboratory Grade Radiometers
【24h】

Accuracy of Irradiance and Power of Light-Curing Units Measured With Handheld or Laboratory Grade Radiometers

机译:手持式或实验室级辐射计测量的光固化单元的辐照度和功率精度

获取原文
           

摘要

This study measured and compared exitance irradiance and power of 4 commercial dental light-curing units (LCU) (Elipar S10, Elipar DeepCure-S, Corded VALO and Bluephase Style) using different types of radiometers. The devices used to analyze the LCU were classified as either handheld analog (Henry Schein, Spring, Demetron 100A, Demetron 100B and Demetron 200), handheld digital (Bluephase 1, Bluephase II, Coltolux, CureRite and Hilux), or laboratory instruments (Thermopile and Integrating Sphere). The laboratory instruments and the Bluephase II radiometer were also used to measure the LCU’s power (mW). The LCU’s were activated for 20 s (n=5). Data were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis and Student-Newman-Keuls multiple comparison test (a=0.05). Among the LCU, the laboratory instruments presented different irradiance values, except for Corded VALO. The Coltolux and Hilux radiometers measured greater irradiance values compared to the laboratory instruments for the four LCUs tested. Within a given LCU, handheld analog units measured lower irradiance values, compared to handheld digital and laboratory instruments, except using the Spring radiometer for the Elipar S10 LCU. None of the handheld radiometers were able to measure similar irradiance values compared to laboratory instruments, except for Elipar S10 when comparing Bluephase 1 and Thermopile. Regarding power measurement, Bluephase II always presented the lowest values compared to the laboratory instruments. These findings suggest that the handheld radiometers utilized by practitioners (analog or digital) exhibit a wide range of irradiance values and may show lower outcomes compared to laboratory based instruments.
机译:这项研究使用不同类型的辐射计测量并比较了4种商用牙科光固化机(LCU)(Elipar S10,Elipar DeepCure-S,有线VALO和Bluephase Style)的出射辐照度和功率。用于分析LCU的设备分为手持式模拟设备(Henry Schein,Spring,Dometron 100A,Demetron 100B和Demetron 200),手持式数字设备(Bluephase 1,Bluephase II,Coltolux,CureRite和Hilux)或实验室仪器(Thermopile)和积分球)。实验室仪器和Bluephase II辐射计也用于测量LCU的功率(mW)。 LCU被激活20 s(n = 5)。使用Kruskal-Wallis和Student-Newman-Keuls多重比较检验分析数据(a = 0.05)。在LCU中,除有线VALO外,实验室仪器的辐照度值不同。与用于测试的四个LCU的实验室仪器相比,Coltolux和Hilux辐射计测量的辐照度值更高。在给定的LCU中,除了使用Elipar S10 LCU的Spring辐射计之外,与手持式数字和实验室仪器相比,手持式模拟装置测量的辐照度值较低。在比较Bluephase 1和Thermopile时,除了Elipar S10之外,没有任何手持式辐射计能够测量与实验室仪器相似的辐照度值。在功率测量方面,与实验室仪器相比,Bluephase II始终呈现最低值。这些发现表明,与实验室仪器相比,从业人员使用的手持式辐射计(模拟或数字)显示出很大的辐照度值,并且结果可能更低。

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