Content area
Purpose: The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the influence of different models of commercially available portable dental radiometers on the measurement of light irradiance emitted by light-emitting diode (LED) photocuring units. Materials and Methods: Eight LED photocuring units, all emitting light in a single-wavelength spectrum, were tested. Light irradiance (mW/cm2) was measured using six portable dental radiometers: four digital models (D1–D4) and two analog models (A1, A2). Digital model D1 was used as the reference (control). All measurements were conducted under standardized conditions, and each LED–radiometer combination was tested in triplicate. Data were analyzed using Sigma Plot 12.0 (Palo Alto, CA, USA) to verify the assumptions of normality and homogeneity of variances. A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to assess the effect of the radiometer model on irradiance values, followed by Tukey’s post hoc test for multiple comparisons. The significance level was set at α < 0.05. Results: No statistically significant difference in irradiance was found between D1 (control) and D2. However, significantly lower values were recorded with A2, while D3, D4, and A1 produced significantly higher irradiance values compared to the control (p < 0.05). Conclusion: Irradiance measurements can vary significantly depending on the radiometer model used. Clinicians should be aware of this variability and are encouraged to regularly check the irradiance of the light-curing units used in daily practice, ensure their proper maintenance, and implement periodic monitoring to maintain effective clinical performance.
Details
; Cáceres Elisa de León 1 ; García Andrés 1
; Rivera-Gonzaga, José Alejandro 2
; Rim, Bourgi 3
; Cuevas-Suárez, Carlos Enrique 2
1 Dental Biomaterials Unit, Department of Preventive and Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of the Republic, Montevideo 11600, Uruguay; [email protected] (M.M.); [email protected] (G.G.); [email protected] (E.d.L.C.); [email protected] (A.G.)
2 Dental Materials Laboratory, Academic Area of Dentistry, Autonomous University of Hidalgo State, San Agustín Tlaxiaca 42160, Mexico; [email protected]
3 Department of Biomaterials and Bioengineering, INSERM UMR_S 1121, University of Strasbourg, 67000 Strasbourg, France; [email protected], Department of Restorative Sciences, Faculty of Dentistry, Beirut Arab University, Beirut 115020, Lebanon, Department of Restorative and Esthetic Dentistry, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Saint-Joseph University of Beirut, Beirut 1107 2180, Lebanon