Method: The study included evaluation of 4 different retentive materials: PMMA Repair Acrylic, ERA® PickUp, Protech® UBAR™ Metal Bonding Acrlyic, and Voco QuickUp. Sample attachments were prepared using each of the materials and shear force was applied to determine the retentive strength. A secondary goal was to examine differences in shear bond strength to the housing between PMMA Repair Acrylic and Protech® UBAR™ Metal Bonding Acrylic.
Result: The primary statistical analysis compared shear bond strength for the four different retentive materials. Voco QuickUp had significantly lower mean bond shear strength relative to the other three materials (Voco QuickUp vs. PMMA Repair Acrylic p < 0.001, Voco QuickUp vs. ERA® PickUp p = 0.020, Voco QuickUp vs. UBAR™ Metal Bonding Acrlyic p = 0.003).
Retentive Material |
Mean Shear Bond Strength |
PMMA Repair Acrylic |
27.6 |
ERA® PickUp |
22.1 |
UBAR™ |
24.4 |
Voco QuickUp |
12.6 |
Conclusion: No statistically significant differences in shear bond strength were shown between PMMA Repair Acrylic, ERA® PickUp and the Protech® UBAR™ Metal Bonding Acrylic materials, while the bond strength for Voco QuickUp was significantly different.