The Effect of Mouthrinses on the Microhardness of Restorative Materials

Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare the effect of three different mouthrinses on the microhardness of three restorative materials. Methods: Teflon moulds were used to build cylindrical specimens 2 mm high and 5 mm diameter. The specimens prepared with visible light cured (VLC) composite resin (TPH spectrum), VLC compomer (Dyract AP) and glass-ionomer cement (Chemfil Posterior) (Dentsplay, USA) were randomly assigned to four groups of seven samples each. After storing the samples in 15 ml of each mouthrinses ( Oral-B, One-Drop Only, Benodent) and a control group stored in distilled water for 12 hours to simulate a 2 min/day for 1 year exposure to mouthrinses Vicker’s hardness were determined. Three measurements were made at the top surfaces of each specimens. Data were analysed using Mann-Whitney U test. Results: Vicker’s hardness values (mean±SD) of TPH spectrum, Dyract AP and Chemfil Posterior after storing in each mouthrinses and distilled water respectively were. Oral-B : 35.02±5.23, 19.21±5.31, 18.29±2.39 One-Drop : 43.58±3.25, 24.65±0.99, 20.94±1.59 Benodent : 40.56±7.03, 20.18±1.24, 19.13±0.62 Distilled water: 47.16±2.64, 43.59±3.53, 15.13±3.01 Significant differences ( p<0.001 ) were obtained between groups related to materials and mouthrinses. Conclusion: Although mouthrinses could affect the hardness of restorative materials, clinically these effects might be modified by many factors as mastification forces, saliva, individual features. Therefore, it is conluded that more studies were necessary to determine the effects of the mouthrinses in vivo.