It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Dental materials are challenged by wear processes in the oral environment and should be evaluated in laboratory tests prior to clinical use. Many laboratory wear-testing devices are high-cost investments and not available for cross-centre comparisons. The ‘Rub&Roll’ wear machine enables controlled application of force, chemical and mechanical loading, but the initial design was not able to test against rigid antagonist materials. The current study aimed to probe the sensitivity of a new ‘Rub&Roll’ set-up by evaluating the effect of force and test solution parameters (deionized water; water + abrasive medium; acid + abrasive medium) on the wear behaviour of direct and indirect dental resin-based composites (RBCs) compared with human molars against 3D-printed rod antagonists. Molars exhibited greater height loss than RBCs in all test groups, with the largest differences recorded with acidic solutions. Direct RBCs showed significantly greater wear than indirect RBCs in the groups containing abrasive media. The acidic + abrasive medium did not result in increased wear of RBC materials. The developed method using the ‘Rub&Roll’ wear machine in the current investigation has provided a sensitive wear test method to allow initial screening of resin-based composite materials compared with extracted human molars under the influence of different mechanical and erosive challenges.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 Friedrich–Alexander Universität Erlangen–Nürnberg, Department of Operative Dentistry and Periodontology, University Hospital Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany (GRID:grid.5330.5) (ISNI:0000 0001 2107 3311); Radboud University Medical Center, Department of Dentistry, Nijmegen, The Netherlands (GRID:grid.10417.33) (ISNI:0000 0004 0444 9382)
2 Radboud University Medical Center, Department of Dentistry, Nijmegen, The Netherlands (GRID:grid.10417.33) (ISNI:0000 0004 0444 9382)
3 University of Birmingham, Dental and Biomaterials Science, School of Dentistry, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, Birmingham, UK (GRID:grid.6572.6) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 7486)
4 Friedrich–Alexander Universität Erlangen–Nürnberg, Department of Oral and Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospital Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany (GRID:grid.5330.5) (ISNI:0000 0001 2107 3311)
5 Friedrich–Alexander Universität Erlangen–Nürnberg, Department of Prosthodontics, University Hospital Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany (GRID:grid.5330.5) (ISNI:0000 0001 2107 3311)




