dc.contributorUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
dc.date.accessioned2014-05-27T11:21:53Z
dc.date.accessioned2022-10-05T18:01:54Z
dc.date.available2014-05-27T11:21:53Z
dc.date.available2022-10-05T18:01:54Z
dc.date.created2014-05-27T11:21:53Z
dc.date.issued2006-07-01
dc.identifierJournal of Prosthodontics, v. 15, n. 4, p. 235-242, 2006.
dc.identifier1059-941X
dc.identifier1532-849X
dc.identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/11449/68938
dc.identifier10.1111/j.1532-849X.2006.00112.x
dc.identifier2-s2.0-33745576539
dc.identifier8000248781842587
dc.identifier3003130522427820
dc.identifier5737127334248549
dc.identifier8867670539105403
dc.identifier0000-0002-7375-4714
dc.identifier.urihttp://repositorioslatinoamericanos.uchile.cl/handle/2250/3918445
dc.description.abstractPurpose: Potential effects on hardness and roughness of a necessary and effective disinfecting regimen (1% sodium hypocholorite and 4% chlorhexidine) were investigated for two hard chairside reline resins versus a heat-polymerizing denture base acrylic resin. Materials and Methods: Two standard hard chairside reliners (Kooliner and Duraliner II), one heat-treated chairside reliner (Duraliner II +10 minutes in water at 55°C), and one standard denture base material (Lucitone 550) were exposed to two disinfecting solutions (1% sodium hypochlorite; 4% chlorhexidine gluconate), and tested for two surface properties [Vickers hardness number (VHN, kg/mm2); Roughness (Ra, μm)] for different times and conditions (1 hour after production, after 48 hours at 37 ± 2°C in water, after two disinfection cycles, after 7 days in disinfection solutions, after 7 days in water only). For each experimental condition, eight specimens were made from each material. Data were analyzed by analysis of variance followed by Tukey's test, and Student's t-test (p= 0.05). Results: For Kooliner (from 6.2 ± 0.3 to 6.5 ± 0.5 VHN) and Lucitone 550 (from 16.5 ± 0.4 to 18.4 ± 1.7 VHN), no significant changes in hardness were observed either after the disinfection or after 7 days of immersion, regardless of the disinfectant solution used. For Duraliner II (from 4.0 ± 0.1 to 4.2 ± 0.1 VHN), with and without heat treatment, a small but significant increase in hardness was observed for the specimens immersed in the disinfectant solutions for 7 days (from 4.3 ± 0.2 to 4.8 ± 0.5 VHN). All materials showed no significant change in roughness (Kooliner: from 0.13 ± 0.05 to 0.48 ± 0.24 μm; Duraliner II, with and without heat treatment: from 0.15 ± 0.04 to 0.29 ± 0.07 μm; Lucitone 550: from 0.44 ± 0.19 to 0.49 ± 0.15 μm) after disinfection and after storage in water for 7 days. Conclusions: The disinfectant solutions, 1% sodium hypochlorite and 4% chlorhexidine gluconate, caused no apparent damage on hardness and roughness of the materials evaluated. Copyright © 2006 by The American College of Prosthodontists.
dc.languageeng
dc.relationJournal of Prosthodontics
dc.relation1.745
dc.rightsAcesso restrito
dc.sourceScopus
dc.subjectDenture base acrylic resins
dc.subjectDisinfection
dc.subjectHard chairside reline resins
dc.subjectHardness
dc.subjectRemovable prostheses
dc.subjectRoughness
dc.subjectacrylic acid resin
dc.subjectchlorhexidine
dc.subjectchlorhexidine gluconate
dc.subjectdisinfectant agent
dc.subjectdrug derivative
dc.subjecthypochlorite sodium
dc.subjectchemistry
dc.subjectdenture
dc.subjectdrug effect
dc.subjecthardness
dc.subjectsurface property
dc.subjecttime
dc.subjectAcrylic Resins
dc.subjectChlorhexidine
dc.subjectDenture Rebasing
dc.subjectDisinfectants
dc.subjectSodium Hypochlorite
dc.subjectSurface Properties
dc.subjectTime Factors
dc.titleEffect of disinfectants on the hardness and roughness of reline acrylic resins
dc.typeArtigo


Este ítem pertenece a la siguiente institución