An in vitro Investigation of the Effects of Glass Inserts on the Effective Composite Resin Polymerization Shrinkage

K. J. Donly, T. W. Wild, R. L. Bowen, Mark Jensen

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

59 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

We placed an MOD preparation in each of 12 permanent molars, then restored each tooth with a posterior composite resin by means of six different application techniques (I-polymerization as one complete unit; II-polymerization as one complete unit with glass inserts; IIIpolymerization in gingivo-occlusal increments; IV-polymerization in gingivo-occlusal increments with glass inserts; V-polymerization in bucco-lingual increments; and VI-polymerization in a gingival increment with glass inserts, then bucco-lingual increments). A precision strain gauge was attached to the buccal surface of each tooth and balanced at zero. After each increment was polymerized, the strain appearing on the strain gauge indicator was recorded. Each tooth was restored by use of all techniques; two teeth started with each technique. Results demonstrated the average microstrain units to be 127-1, 102-11, 105-III, 86-IV, 72-V, and 66-VI. A randomized block design was the format used for data evaluation. Scheffé's Test indicated that composite resin placement and polymerization in bucco-lingual increments (V) created significantly less cuspal deflection than polymerization as one complete unit, with or without glass inserts (I and II), p<0.001, and gingivo-occlusal increments (III), p<0.05. Placement and polymerization in a gingival increment with glass inserts, then bucco-lingual increments (VI), also created significantly less internal deflection than polymerization as one complete unit, with or without glass inserts (I and II), p<0.001, and gingivo-occlusal increments (III), p < 0_005.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1234-1237
Number of pages4
JournalJournal of Dental Research
Volume68
Issue number8
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 1989

Fingerprint

Composite Resins
Polymerization
Glass
Tongue
Tooth
In Vitro Techniques
Cheek

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Dentistry(all)

Cite this

An in vitro Investigation of the Effects of Glass Inserts on the Effective Composite Resin Polymerization Shrinkage. / Donly, K. J.; Wild, T. W.; Bowen, R. L.; Jensen, Mark.

In: Journal of Dental Research, Vol. 68, No. 8, 01.01.1989, p. 1234-1237.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Donly, K. J. ; Wild, T. W. ; Bowen, R. L. ; Jensen, Mark. / An in vitro Investigation of the Effects of Glass Inserts on the Effective Composite Resin Polymerization Shrinkage. In: Journal of Dental Research. 1989 ; Vol. 68, No. 8. pp. 1234-1237.
@article{e3a84288e06246f6a999930449399fda,
title = "An in vitro Investigation of the Effects of Glass Inserts on the Effective Composite Resin Polymerization Shrinkage",
abstract = "We placed an MOD preparation in each of 12 permanent molars, then restored each tooth with a posterior composite resin by means of six different application techniques (I-polymerization as one complete unit; II-polymerization as one complete unit with glass inserts; IIIpolymerization in gingivo-occlusal increments; IV-polymerization in gingivo-occlusal increments with glass inserts; V-polymerization in bucco-lingual increments; and VI-polymerization in a gingival increment with glass inserts, then bucco-lingual increments). A precision strain gauge was attached to the buccal surface of each tooth and balanced at zero. After each increment was polymerized, the strain appearing on the strain gauge indicator was recorded. Each tooth was restored by use of all techniques; two teeth started with each technique. Results demonstrated the average microstrain units to be 127-1, 102-11, 105-III, 86-IV, 72-V, and 66-VI. A randomized block design was the format used for data evaluation. Scheff{\'e}'s Test indicated that composite resin placement and polymerization in bucco-lingual increments (V) created significantly less cuspal deflection than polymerization as one complete unit, with or without glass inserts (I and II), p<0.001, and gingivo-occlusal increments (III), p<0.05. Placement and polymerization in a gingival increment with glass inserts, then bucco-lingual increments (VI), also created significantly less internal deflection than polymerization as one complete unit, with or without glass inserts (I and II), p<0.001, and gingivo-occlusal increments (III), p < 0_005.",
author = "Donly, {K. J.} and Wild, {T. W.} and Bowen, {R. L.} and Mark Jensen",
year = "1989",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/00220345890680080401",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "68",
pages = "1234--1237",
journal = "Journal of Dental Research",
issn = "0022-0345",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
number = "8",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - An in vitro Investigation of the Effects of Glass Inserts on the Effective Composite Resin Polymerization Shrinkage

AU - Donly, K. J.

AU - Wild, T. W.

AU - Bowen, R. L.

AU - Jensen, Mark

PY - 1989/1/1

Y1 - 1989/1/1

N2 - We placed an MOD preparation in each of 12 permanent molars, then restored each tooth with a posterior composite resin by means of six different application techniques (I-polymerization as one complete unit; II-polymerization as one complete unit with glass inserts; IIIpolymerization in gingivo-occlusal increments; IV-polymerization in gingivo-occlusal increments with glass inserts; V-polymerization in bucco-lingual increments; and VI-polymerization in a gingival increment with glass inserts, then bucco-lingual increments). A precision strain gauge was attached to the buccal surface of each tooth and balanced at zero. After each increment was polymerized, the strain appearing on the strain gauge indicator was recorded. Each tooth was restored by use of all techniques; two teeth started with each technique. Results demonstrated the average microstrain units to be 127-1, 102-11, 105-III, 86-IV, 72-V, and 66-VI. A randomized block design was the format used for data evaluation. Scheffé's Test indicated that composite resin placement and polymerization in bucco-lingual increments (V) created significantly less cuspal deflection than polymerization as one complete unit, with or without glass inserts (I and II), p<0.001, and gingivo-occlusal increments (III), p<0.05. Placement and polymerization in a gingival increment with glass inserts, then bucco-lingual increments (VI), also created significantly less internal deflection than polymerization as one complete unit, with or without glass inserts (I and II), p<0.001, and gingivo-occlusal increments (III), p < 0_005.

AB - We placed an MOD preparation in each of 12 permanent molars, then restored each tooth with a posterior composite resin by means of six different application techniques (I-polymerization as one complete unit; II-polymerization as one complete unit with glass inserts; IIIpolymerization in gingivo-occlusal increments; IV-polymerization in gingivo-occlusal increments with glass inserts; V-polymerization in bucco-lingual increments; and VI-polymerization in a gingival increment with glass inserts, then bucco-lingual increments). A precision strain gauge was attached to the buccal surface of each tooth and balanced at zero. After each increment was polymerized, the strain appearing on the strain gauge indicator was recorded. Each tooth was restored by use of all techniques; two teeth started with each technique. Results demonstrated the average microstrain units to be 127-1, 102-11, 105-III, 86-IV, 72-V, and 66-VI. A randomized block design was the format used for data evaluation. Scheffé's Test indicated that composite resin placement and polymerization in bucco-lingual increments (V) created significantly less cuspal deflection than polymerization as one complete unit, with or without glass inserts (I and II), p<0.001, and gingivo-occlusal increments (III), p<0.05. Placement and polymerization in a gingival increment with glass inserts, then bucco-lingual increments (VI), also created significantly less internal deflection than polymerization as one complete unit, with or without glass inserts (I and II), p<0.001, and gingivo-occlusal increments (III), p < 0_005.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0024712430&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0024712430&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/00220345890680080401

DO - 10.1177/00220345890680080401

M3 - Article

C2 - 2632610

AN - SCOPUS:0024712430

VL - 68

SP - 1234

EP - 1237

JO - Journal of Dental Research

JF - Journal of Dental Research

SN - 0022-0345

IS - 8

ER -