Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorOliveira-Junior, Osmir Batista [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorBuso, Leonardo
dc.contributor.authorFujiy, Fabio Hiroshi
dc.contributor.authorLombardo, Geraldo Henrique Leao
dc.contributor.authorCampos, Fernanda [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorSarmento, Hugo Ramalho
dc.contributor.authorSouza, Rodrigo Othavio Assuncao
dc.date.accessioned2014-05-27T11:27:33Z
dc.date.available2014-05-27T11:27:33Z
dc.date.issued2013-01-01
dc.identifierhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23302371
dc.identifier.citationGeneral Dentistry, v. 61, n. 1, 2013.
dc.identifier.issn0363-6771
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11449/74327
dc.description.abstractThe aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of 2 different surface polishing procedures - glazing (GZ) and manual polishing (MP) - on the roughness of ceramics processed by computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) and conventional systems (stratification technique). Eighty ceramic discs (diameter: 8 mm, thickness: 1 mm) were prepared and divided among 8 groups (n = 10) according to the type of ceramic disc and polishing method: 4 GZ and 4 MP. Specimens were glazed according to each manufacturer's recommendations. Two silicone polishing points were used on the ceramic surface for manual polishing. Roughness was measured using a surface roughness tester. The roughness measurements were made along a distance of 2 mm on the sample surface and the speed of reading was 0.1 mm/s. Three measurements were taken for each sample. The data (μm) were statistically analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey's test (α = 0.05). Qualitative analysis was performed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). The mean (± SD) roughness values obtained for GZ were: 1.1 ± 0.40 μm; 1.0 ± 0.31 μm; 1.6 ± 0.31 μm; and 2.2 ± 0.73 μm. For MP, the mean values were: 0.66 ± 0.13 μm; 0.43 ± 0.14 μm; 1.6 ± 0.55 μm; and 2.0 ± 0.63 μm. The mean roughness values were significantly affected by the ceramic type (P = 0.0001) and polishing technique (P = 0.0047). The SEM images confirmed the roughness data. The manually polished glass CAD/CAM ceramics promoted lower surface roughness than did the glazed feldspathic dental ceramics.en
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofGeneral Dentistry
dc.sourceScopus
dc.titleInfluence of polishing procedures on the surface roughness of dental ceramics made by different techniquesen
dc.typeArtigo
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Federal de Pernambuco (UFPE)
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Federal da Paraíba (UFPB)
dc.description.affiliationDepartment of Restorative Dentistry Sao Paulo State University Araraquara Dental School (UNESP), Araraquara
dc.description.affiliationSao Jose Dos Campos Dental School Sao Paulo State University, Sao Jose dos Campos
dc.description.affiliationFederal University of Pelotas (UFPel), Rio Grande do Sul
dc.description.affiliationDepartment of Restorative Dentistry Division of Prosthodontics Federal University of Paraiba (UFPB), Joao Pessoa
dc.description.affiliationUnespDepartment of Restorative Dentistry Sao Paulo State University Araraquara Dental School (UNESP), Araraquara
dc.description.affiliationUnespSao Jose Dos Campos Dental School Sao Paulo State University, Sao Jose dos Campos
dc.rights.accessRightsAcesso restrito
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-84873857727
unesp.campusUniversidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP), Faculdade de Odontologia, Araraquarapt
dc.relation.ispartofsjr0,206
Localize o texto completo

Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record