연마 방법과 칫솔질이 아크릴릭 레진의 표면 거칠기에 미치는 영향
The effects of polishing technique and brushing on the surface roughness of acrylic resin
0
조회
0
다운로드
3
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
연구 목적: 본 연구는 연마 술식에 따른 polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA)의 표면 거칠기의 차이를 비교하고, 광중합 광택제가PMMA의 표면 거칠기에 주는 영향과 이후 칫솔질에 의한 거칠기의 변화를 알아보는데 그 목적이 있다. 연구 재료 및 방법: 총 60개의 10×10×5 mm 크기의 PMMA 시편을 만들었다. 중합 방법 (압력 하 중합과 대기압 하 중합)과 표면연마방법 (기계적 연마와 화학적 연마)에 따라 대조군을 포함하여 각 10개씩 총 6군으로 나누었다. 기계적 연마는 카바이드 덴처버로 표면 마무리 한 후, 러버 포인트와 퍼미스를 이용하여 하였으며, 화학적 연마는 표면 마무리 후 광중합 광택제 (Plaquit(R) Dreve-Dentamid GMBH)를 도포하여 실시 하였다. 연마가 완료된 후 비 접촉식 3차원적 표면 형상 분석장치인 Accura 2000(R)으로 표면거칠기를 측정하였으며, 그 3차원적 영상을 얻었다. 그 후 칫솔질에 의한 마모의 영향을 평가하기 위해 초음파 전동 칫솔을 이용하여 각 시편당 칫솔질을 행하고 다시 Accura 2000(R)에 의한 표면 분석을 시행하였으며, 거칠기의 정도는 Ra 값으로 표시하였다. 연마 후와 칫솔질 후의 표면 거칠기를 비교하기 위한 통계적 분석은 Mann-Whitney test와 t-test를 이용하여 95% 유의수준에서 실시하였다. 결과: 화학적 연마군은 기계적 연마군에 비해 통계적으로 유의한 작은 평균 표면 거칠기 값을 보였으며 (P = .0045), 일반 대기압 하에서 중합시킨 군에서 그 차이가 더 크게 나타났다 (P = .0138). 초음파 전동 칫솔에 의한 모의 칫솔질 후 표면 거칠기는 기계적 연마군을 제외한 모든 군에서 크게 증가하였으며, 칫솔질 후의 표면 거칠기는 각 군에서 통계적으로 유의한 차이를 보이지 않았다. 결론: 비록 칫솔질에 의한 마모의 영향으로 표면 거칠기가 증가하기는 하지만, 화학적 연마가 기계적 연마에 비해 우수한 표면 거칠기를 보인다고 할 수 있다.
Abstract
Purpose: This study evaluated the effect of polishing techniques on surface roughness of polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA), as well as the influence of light-cured surface glaze and subsequent brushing on surface roughness. Materials and methods: A total of 60 PMMA specimens (10×10×5 mm) were made and then divided into 6 groups of 10 each according to the polymerization methods (under pressure or atmosphere) and the surface polishing methods (mechanical or chemical polishing) including 2 control groups. The mechanical polishing was performed with the carbide denture bur, rubber points and then pumice and lathe wheel. The chemical polishing was performed by applying a light-cured surface glaze (Plaquit(R) Dreve-Dentamid GmbH). Accura 2000(R), a non-contact, non-destructive, optical 3-dimensional surface analysis system, was used to measure the surface roughness (Ra) and 3-dimensional images were acquired. The surface roughness was again measured after ultrasonic tooth brushing in order to evaluate the influence of brushing on the surface roughness. The statistical analysis was performed with Mann-Whitney test and t-test using a 95% level of confidence. Results: The chemically polished group showed a statistically lower mean surface roughness in comparison to the mechanically polished group (P = .0045) and the specimens polymerized under the atmospheric pressure presented a more significant difference (P = .0138). After brushing, all of the groups, except the mechanically polished group, presented rougher surfaces and showed no statistically significant differences between groups. Conclusion: Although the surface roughness increased after brushing, the chemical polishing technique presented an improved surface condition in comparison to the mechanical polishing technique.
참고문헌 (22)
- Christensen GJ, "The fastest and best provisional restorations", J Am Dent Assoc, 134, pp.637~639 (2003)
- De Rouck T, "Instant provisionalization of immediate single-tooth implants is essential to optimize esthetic treatment outcome", Clin Oral Implants Res, 20, pp.566~570 (2009)
- Block MS, "Prospective evaluation of immediate and delayed provisional single tooth restorations", J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 67, pp.89~107 (2009)
- Quirynen M, "The influence of surface free energy and surface roughness on early plaque formation. An in vivo study in man", J Clin Periodontol, 17, pp.138~144 (1990)
- Taylor R, "Retention of oral microorganisms on cobalt-chromium alloy and dental acrylic resin with different surface finishes", J Prosthet Dent, 80, pp.592~597 (1998)
- Radford DR, "Adherence of Candida albicans to denture-base materials with different surface finishes", J Dent, 26, pp.577~583 (1998)
- Quirynen M, "The influence of surface roughness and surface-free energy on supra- and subgingival plaque formation in man. A review of the literature", J Clin Periodontol, 22, pp.1~14 (1995)
- Bollen CM, "Comparison of surface roughness of oral hard materials to the threshold surface roughness for bacterial plaque retention: a review of the literature", Dent Mater, 13, pp.258~269 (1997)
- Herrgott AM, "An evaluation of different composite resin systems finished with various abrasives", J Am Dent Assoc, 119, pp.729~732 (1989)
- Lutz F, "A classification and evaluation of composite resin systems", J Prosthet Dent, 50, pp.480~488 (1983)
- McLundie AC, "Comparison of methods used in finishing composite resin--a scanning electron microscope study", J Prosthet Dent, 31, pp.163~171 (1974)
- Heath JR, "Surface roughness of restorations", Br Dent J, 140, pp.131~137 (1976)
- Loney RW, "Finishing and polishing of a poly (fluoroalkoxyphosphazene) resilient denture liner", Int J Prosthodont, 7, pp.362~367 (1994)
- Maalhagh-Fard A, "Evaluation of surface finish and polish of eight provisional restorative materials using acrylic bur and abrasive disk with and without pumice", Oper Dent, 28, pp.734~739 (2003)
- de Gee AJ, "Some aspects of vacuum mixing of composite resins and its effect on porosity", Quintessence Int Dent Dig, 10, pp.69~74 (1979)
- Finger W, "Porosity of composite filling materials", SSO Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnheilkd, 87, pp.482~489 (1977)
- Lambrechts P, "The use of glazing materials for finishing dental composite resin surfaces", J Oral Rehabil, 9, pp.107~117 (1982)
- Stoddard JW, "An evaluation of polishing agents for composite resins", J Prosthet Dent, 65, pp.491~495 (1991)
- Budtz-Jörgensen E, "Clinical effects of glazing denture acrylic resin bases using an ultraviolet curing method", Scand J Dent Res, 94, pp.569~574 (1986)
- Kuhar M, "Effects of polishing techniques on the surface roughness of acrylic denture base resins", J Prosthet Dent, 93, pp.76~85 (2005)
- Neme AM, "The effect of prophylactic polishing pastes and toothbrushing on the surface roughness of resin composite materials in vitro", Oper Dent, 28, pp.808~815 (2003)
- Cho LR, "Effect of tooth brushing and thermal cycling on a surface change of ceromers finished with different methods", J Oral Rehabil, 29, pp.816~822 (2002)