Francisco Javier Rojas-Macedo, Bernardo Teutle-Coyotecatl, Rosalía Contreras-Bulnes, Laura Emma Rodríguez-Vilchis, Eric Reyes-Cervantes, Ulises Velazquez-Enriquez
{"title":"聚合方法对市售自固化丙烯酸树脂表面粗糙度和硬度的影响:比较研究","authors":"Francisco Javier Rojas-Macedo, Bernardo Teutle-Coyotecatl, Rosalía Contreras-Bulnes, Laura Emma Rodríguez-Vilchis, Eric Reyes-Cervantes, Ulises Velazquez-Enriquez","doi":"10.1108/prt-12-2023-0120","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Purpose</h3>\n<p>This paper aims to compare the surface roughness and hardness of three commercially available self-curing acrylic resins for dental use, under different polymerization conditions.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\n<p>A comparative <em>in vitro</em> study was conducted using a convenience sample of 12 × 5 × 2 mm blocks with <em>n</em> = 40 for each material (Nic Tone, Arias Plus and Orthocryl®), with subgroups according to the polymerization method: conventional (C) and polymerization under ambient conditions (A). The surface roughness of the materials was measured using a profilometer; hardness was measured with a portable hardness tester. Additionally, surface morphology as well as particles size and morphology were evaluated with scanning electron microscopy.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Findings</h3>\n<p>There were significant differences in roughness and hardness values between the three self-curing acrylic resins (<em>p</em> < 0.05), as well as within each self-curing acrylic resin according to the polymerization method used (<em>p</em> < 0.05). The samples polymerized with the conventional method presented lower surface roughness and hardness values.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\n<p>This study provides scientific evidence of values not provided by manufacturers in relation to the surface roughness and hardness of these materials, and all of them met the ideal minimum values of surface roughness, regardless of the polymerization technique used.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->","PeriodicalId":20214,"journal":{"name":"Pigment & Resin Technology","volume":"103 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effect of polymerization methods on surface roughness and hardness of commercially available self-curing acrylic resins: a comparative study\",\"authors\":\"Francisco Javier Rojas-Macedo, Bernardo Teutle-Coyotecatl, Rosalía Contreras-Bulnes, Laura Emma Rodríguez-Vilchis, Eric Reyes-Cervantes, Ulises Velazquez-Enriquez\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/prt-12-2023-0120\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<h3>Purpose</h3>\\n<p>This paper aims to compare the surface roughness and hardness of three commercially available self-curing acrylic resins for dental use, under different polymerization conditions.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\\n<p>A comparative <em>in vitro</em> study was conducted using a convenience sample of 12 × 5 × 2 mm blocks with <em>n</em> = 40 for each material (Nic Tone, Arias Plus and Orthocryl®), with subgroups according to the polymerization method: conventional (C) and polymerization under ambient conditions (A). The surface roughness of the materials was measured using a profilometer; hardness was measured with a portable hardness tester. Additionally, surface morphology as well as particles size and morphology were evaluated with scanning electron microscopy.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Findings</h3>\\n<p>There were significant differences in roughness and hardness values between the three self-curing acrylic resins (<em>p</em> < 0.05), as well as within each self-curing acrylic resin according to the polymerization method used (<em>p</em> < 0.05). The samples polymerized with the conventional method presented lower surface roughness and hardness values.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\\n<p>This study provides scientific evidence of values not provided by manufacturers in relation to the surface roughness and hardness of these materials, and all of them met the ideal minimum values of surface roughness, regardless of the polymerization technique used.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\",\"PeriodicalId\":20214,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pigment & Resin Technology\",\"volume\":\"103 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pigment & Resin Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"88\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/prt-12-2023-0120\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"材料科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, APPLIED\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pigment & Resin Technology","FirstCategoryId":"88","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/prt-12-2023-0120","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"材料科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的 本文旨在比较三种市售牙科用自固化丙烯酸树脂在不同聚合条件下的表面粗糙度和硬度。设计/方法/途径 使用 12 × 5 × 2 毫米的块状样本进行了体外比较研究,每种材料(Nic Tone、Arias Plus 和 Orthocryl®)的样本数为 n = 40,根据聚合方法分为常规组(C)和在环境条件下聚合组(A)。材料的表面粗糙度用轮廓仪测量,硬度用便携式硬度计测量。结果三种自固化丙烯酸树脂之间的粗糙度和硬度值存在显著差异(p <0.05),每种自固化丙烯酸树脂内部的粗糙度和硬度值也因聚合方法不同而存在显著差异(p <0.05)。原创性/价值这项研究提供了科学证据,证明这些材料的表面粗糙度和硬度值并非由制造商提供,而且无论使用哪种聚合技术,所有这些材料都达到了理想的最低表面粗糙度值。
Effect of polymerization methods on surface roughness and hardness of commercially available self-curing acrylic resins: a comparative study
Purpose
This paper aims to compare the surface roughness and hardness of three commercially available self-curing acrylic resins for dental use, under different polymerization conditions.
Design/methodology/approach
A comparative in vitro study was conducted using a convenience sample of 12 × 5 × 2 mm blocks with n = 40 for each material (Nic Tone, Arias Plus and Orthocryl®), with subgroups according to the polymerization method: conventional (C) and polymerization under ambient conditions (A). The surface roughness of the materials was measured using a profilometer; hardness was measured with a portable hardness tester. Additionally, surface morphology as well as particles size and morphology were evaluated with scanning electron microscopy.
Findings
There were significant differences in roughness and hardness values between the three self-curing acrylic resins (p < 0.05), as well as within each self-curing acrylic resin according to the polymerization method used (p < 0.05). The samples polymerized with the conventional method presented lower surface roughness and hardness values.
Originality/value
This study provides scientific evidence of values not provided by manufacturers in relation to the surface roughness and hardness of these materials, and all of them met the ideal minimum values of surface roughness, regardless of the polymerization technique used.
期刊介绍:
The journal looks at developments in: ■Adhesives and sealants ■Curing and coatings ■Wood coatings and preservatives ■Environmentally compliant coating systems and pigments ■Inks for food packaging ■Manufacturing machinery - reactors, mills mixing and dispersing equipment, pumps ■Packaging, labeling and storage ■Plus topical features and news on materials, coatings, industry people, conferences, books and so on ■Raw materials such as pigments, solvents, resins and chemicals ■Testing equipment and procedures