IADR Abstract Archives
Comparison of Initial Stickiness of Glass Ionomer Restoratives
Objectives: The handling of restorative materials is highly important to the dentist and is particularly crucial in the use of self-cure glass ionomers (GIs), in which very little time is available to apply and shape the material. Contouring GIs following placement can cause voids when the material sticks to the instrument, making a material that exhibits low stickiness ideal. The aim of this study was to quantify and compare the initial stickiness of various GI restorative materials.
Methods: Seven commercially available GIs were tested (Table 1). Restoratives were activated and mixed according to manufacturers’ instructions and extruded into a heated cavity (34○C). A spatula was used to level the surface. Initial stickiness of GIs was assessed using a Texture Analyzer (TA.XTplus, Stable Micro Systems, UK) (load cell 10N) by measuring the displacement and withdrawal work (N*mm). 30s after mixing commenced, a metal ball plunger (4mm diameter) was lowered and embedded 2mm into the sample at a constant speed (3mm/sec). The plunger was then withdrawn at the same speed. Height was calibrated between measurements. Stickiness was defined as the ratio of the withdrawal work to the displacement work and expressed as a percentage, with lower percentages indicating less stickiness. Data was analyzed using one-way ANOVA, with Tukey’s HSD for post-hoc tests.
Results: A statistically significant difference (p<0.05) in stickiness was found among the materials tested. See Table 1.
Conclusions: This evaluation quantified stickiness and indicated that GI materials display significantly different degrees of initial stickiness. Ketac™ Universal Aplicap™ (3M ESPE) was found to be least sticky. GIs with low stickiness have the potential to improve ease of handling for dentists. Additional studies should evaluate stickiness at different intervals within the working time of GIs.
Methods: Seven commercially available GIs were tested (Table 1). Restoratives were activated and mixed according to manufacturers’ instructions and extruded into a heated cavity (34○C). A spatula was used to level the surface. Initial stickiness of GIs was assessed using a Texture Analyzer (TA.XTplus, Stable Micro Systems, UK) (load cell 10N) by measuring the displacement and withdrawal work (N*mm). 30s after mixing commenced, a metal ball plunger (4mm diameter) was lowered and embedded 2mm into the sample at a constant speed (3mm/sec). The plunger was then withdrawn at the same speed. Height was calibrated between measurements. Stickiness was defined as the ratio of the withdrawal work to the displacement work and expressed as a percentage, with lower percentages indicating less stickiness. Data was analyzed using one-way ANOVA, with Tukey’s HSD for post-hoc tests.
Results: A statistically significant difference (p<0.05) in stickiness was found among the materials tested. See Table 1.
Conclusions: This evaluation quantified stickiness and indicated that GI materials display significantly different degrees of initial stickiness. Ketac™ Universal Aplicap™ (3M ESPE) was found to be least sticky. GIs with low stickiness have the potential to improve ease of handling for dentists. Additional studies should evaluate stickiness at different intervals within the working time of GIs.
2387237_File000000.jpg