IADR Abstract Archives

All-in-one adhesive systems require repetition to use for dental students

Objectives: Recently all-in-one adhesive agent is one of the most frequently used adhesive materials in daily dental practice. However there are many reports which indicate disadvantages of the all-in-one adhesive system. One of them is technique sensitivity. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the technique sensitivity, investigating how much repetition was required for undergraduate dental students in order to obtain adequate and stable bond strengths of all-in-one adhesive systems.

Materials and Methods: We used two kinds of all-in-one adhesive systems, BONDFORCE (BF, TOKUYAMA), Optibond All-In-One (OB, Kerr) and one 2-step self-etch-system, Clearfil SE Bond (SE, Kuraray). 45 healthy extracted human third molars according to the ethic committee of Hokkaido University's regulation were cut to expose dentin surface and ground by #600 silicon carbide paper. They were randomly divided into 15 groups. Three fourth year dental students performed adhesive procedure on 5 different days for adhesive. After 1 day in water at 37 Celsius degree, specimens were cut into sticks and tested the micro-tensile bond strength test. The data was analyzed by One-way-ANOVA and Bonferroni test or Kruscal-Wallis and Scheffe test.

Results: The table shows the micro-tensile bond strength (MPa).Although the data of SE Bond shows clear growth tendency, the micro-tensile bond strength for BONDFORCE and OptiBond All-In-One varied grately depending on students.

First time

Second time

Third time

Fourth time

Fifth time

BF

Student A

24.2 ± 12.3

18.6 ± 11.7

22.6 ± 23.9

28.2 ± 27.3

20.2 ± 9.1

Student B

48.8 ± 32.0

17.3 ± 4.9

56.4 ± 23.1

10.8 ± 10.2

14.8 ± 8.8

Student C

7.0 ± 2.5

6.2 ± 1.2

9.6 ± 3.3

12.8 ± 7.0

24.0 ± 24.0

OB

Student A

48.0 ± 15.9

66.1 ± 22.6

55.2 ± 15.5

60.2 ± 15.2

67.4 ± 10.6

Student B

64.5 ± 17.3

40.4 ± 24.0

57.2 ± 18.2

63.4 ± 19.3

28.8 ± 25.5

Student C

31.2 ± 22.2

79.2 ± 22.3

50.6 ± 14.1

89.8 ± 18.8

67.5 ± 17.6

SE

Student A

11.7 ± 6.5

29.7 ± 17.7

73.5 ± 25.7

57.5 ± 23.6

60.2 ± 14.8

Student B

17.4 ± 13.4

63.6 ± 19.9

73.8 ± 22.5

86.1 ± 19.4

75.9 ± 19.6

Student C

55.4 ± 25.7

45.4 ± 27.8

75.2 ± 20.9

95.1 ± 23.6

68.6 ± 13.2

Conclusions: The 2-step self-etch-system required less repetition to obtain stable bond strength than the all-in-one adhesive systems for under graduate students.


Continental European, Israeli, Scandinavian Divisions Meeting
2009 Continental European, Israeli, Scandinavian Divisions Meeting (Munich, Germany)
Munich Germany
2009
49
Scientific Groups
  • Mita, Tsuneyuki  ( Hokkaido U Dent, Sapporo, N/A, Japan )
  • Nagano, Futami  ( Health Sciences University of Hokkaido, Ishikari-Tobetsu, N/A, Japan )
  • Hongo, Hiromi  ( Hokkaido U Dent, Sapporo, N/A, Japan )
  • Mikawa, Yohei  ( Hokkaido U Dent, Sapporo, N/A, Japan )
  • Nakaoki, Yasuko  ( Hokkaido University, Graduate School of Dental Medicine, Sapporo, N/A, Japan )
  • Hoshika, Shuhei  ( Hokkaido University, Sapporo, N/A, Japan )
  • Selimovic, Denis  ( University of Louis Pasteur, Strasbourg, N/A, France )
  • Sano, Hidehiko  ( Hokkaido University, Sapporo, N/A, Japan )
  • Poster Discussion Session
    Oral Poster Discussion I
    09/10/2009