The Importance of Enhanced Visual Acuity in Evaluation of Polishing Composite Resins
Abstract
Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the importance of enhanced visual acuity in evaluation of polishing composite resins. Material and Methods: Forty-five composite samples were used. Finishing and polishing discs were used to produce samples with different surface roughness values (Ra). The observers examined the resin surfaces according to the following scale: 1: Smooth (0.01-0.2) (Ra); 2: Medium (0.2-0.6) (Ra) and 3: Rough (0.6-1.0) (Ra). Observers used following evaluation methods: 1: Naked eye; 2: 4× magnification dental loupe; 3: Same loupe with an LED lamp; 4: DOM (Dental Operation Microscope) at 5× magnification, with a Xenon lighting system; 5: Same DOM at 12.5× magnification with a Xenon source. Results: Moderate magnification (4× and 5×) with LED or Xenon lighting is more accurate than the naked eye in terms of rating surface smoothness. The results at moderate magnifications (4× and 5×) were more accurate than those at high magnification (12.5×). Conclusions: The naked eye, low magnification with reflector light, and high magnification with xenon light were unsatisfactory methods of evaluating surface smoothness. Clinical Relevance: Moderate magnification with xenon or LED light was more satisfactory for evaluating the surface smoothness of a resin material in clinical conditions.
Full Text: PDF DOI: 10.15640/ijhs.v4n4a3
Abstract
Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the importance of enhanced visual acuity in evaluation of polishing composite resins. Material and Methods: Forty-five composite samples were used. Finishing and polishing discs were used to produce samples with different surface roughness values (Ra). The observers examined the resin surfaces according to the following scale: 1: Smooth (0.01-0.2) (Ra); 2: Medium (0.2-0.6) (Ra) and 3: Rough (0.6-1.0) (Ra). Observers used following evaluation methods: 1: Naked eye; 2: 4× magnification dental loupe; 3: Same loupe with an LED lamp; 4: DOM (Dental Operation Microscope) at 5× magnification, with a Xenon lighting system; 5: Same DOM at 12.5× magnification with a Xenon source. Results: Moderate magnification (4× and 5×) with LED or Xenon lighting is more accurate than the naked eye in terms of rating surface smoothness. The results at moderate magnifications (4× and 5×) were more accurate than those at high magnification (12.5×). Conclusions: The naked eye, low magnification with reflector light, and high magnification with xenon light were unsatisfactory methods of evaluating surface smoothness. Clinical Relevance: Moderate magnification with xenon or LED light was more satisfactory for evaluating the surface smoothness of a resin material in clinical conditions.
Full Text: PDF DOI: 10.15640/ijhs.v4n4a3
Browse Journals
Journal Policies
Information
Useful Links
- Call for Papers
- Submit Your Paper
- Publish in Your Native Language
- Subscribe the Journal
- Frequently Asked Questions
- Contact the Executive Editor
- Recommend this Journal to Librarian
- View the Current Issue
- View the Previous Issues
- Recommend this Journal to Friends
- Recommend a Special Issue
- Comment on the Journal
- Publish the Conference Proceedings
Latest Activities
Resources
Visiting Status
Today | 44 |
Yesterday | 359 |
This Month | 9360 |
Last Month | 10934 |
All Days | 1929095 |
Online | 11 |