Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 4
Tests of Between-Subjects Effects Dependent Variable: Hardness Source Type III Sum of Squares df Mean Square
Tests of Between-Subjects Effects
Dependent Variable: Hardness
Source
Type III Sum
of Squares
df
Mean Square
F
Sig
Corrected Model
Intercept
RESIN
DISINFEC
TIMEDUR
RESIN * DISINFEC
RESIN *TIMEDUR
DISINFEC*TIMEDUR
RESIN * DISINFEC*
Error
Total
Corrected Total
a
12.847
28.755
0.000
526.737
41
118853.413
1
118853.413
266018.3
0.000
400
1
0.400
0.894
0.346
4.731
2
2.365
5.294
0.006
483.046
6
80.508
180.193
0.000
10.149
2
5.074
11.358
0.000
12.329
6
2.055
4.599
0.000
13.867
12
1.156
2.586
0.004
2.216
12
0.185
0.413
0.957
75.060
168
0.447
119455.210
210
601.797
209
A:- R Squared = 0.875 (Adjusted R Squared = 0.845)
Table 3: Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)
Multiple Comparisons
Dependent Variable: Hardness
(I) Disinfectant
(J) Disinfectant
Mean
95% Confidence Interval
Difference
Std.
Signi-
(I-J)
Error
ficance
Lower Bound Upper Bound
0.2641
Sodium Hypochloride Chlorhexidine
Control
9.143E-03
0.1130
1.000
0.2824
0.3137*
0.5869
-4.0498E-02
0.1130
0.018
Chlorhexidine
-9.1429E-03
Sodium Hypochloride
Control
0.1130
1.000
0.2824
0.2641
0.3229*
0.1130
0.014
0.5961
-4.9641E-02
Control
Sodium Hypochloride
Chlorhexidine
0.3137*
0.1130
0.018
4.050E-02
0.5869
0.3229*
0.1130
0.014
4.964E-02
0.5961
Based on observed means
*The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.
Table 4: Multiple comparisons test
Mean Hardness of Conventional Resin
Sodium Hypochloride Chlor hexidine Control
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Baseline
Post Disinfection 15 days
30 days
60 days
90 days
120 days
Time Duration
Graph 1: Mean hardness of Conventional resin
109
Hardness
Indian J Stomatol 2012;3(2):106-12 Sodium Hypochloride Chlor hexidine Control 30 25 20 15 10 5 0
Indian J Stomatol 2012;3(2):106-12
Sodium Hypochloride
Chlor hexidine
Control
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
15 days
30 days
60 days
90 days
120 days
Baseline
Post
Disinfection
Graph 2: Mean hardness of High impact resin
Interaction Plot (fitted means) for Hardness
26
Resin
24
Resin
Conventional Resin
High Impact Resin
22
26
Disinfectant
Chlorhexidine
24
Control
Disinfectant
Sodium Hypochloride
22
Time Duration
Graph 3: Multiple comparison test
Estimated Marginal Means of Hardness
27
26
25
24
23
Resin
22
Conventional Resin
21
High impact Resin
Baseline
15 days
60 days
120 days
Post Disinfection
30 days
90 days
Time Duration
Graph 4: Estimated marginal mean of both resins
110
Estimated Marginal Means

Indian J Stomatol 2012;3(2):106-12

difference in hardness was seen between conventional and high impact resins (P>0.05). Both resins showed decrease in hardness immediately post disinfection (after 48 hours). Results obtained by 3 way ANOVA showed no significant difference between the conventional and high impact resins (Table 3) (P>0.05). The interaction (joint effect) between resin and disinfectant and between resin and time duration was significant (P<0.001). But the interaction effect of all the three factors was not significant (P>0.05). To check significant difference between pair of disinfec- tants, multiple comparison test was carried out using Bonferroni's method (Table 4). Results showed significant difference between all the time intervals (P<0.05) except 60 days and 90 days (P>0.05) (Graph 3). The most important factor in this study was time duration and it was seen that 120 days yielded better hardness compared to other time intervals. The results demonstrated that initially conventional resin showed slightly higher mean hardness values than high impact resin, which was not statistically significant and was also reversed by the end of 120 days (Graph 4).

Discussion

Hardness measurements have been used successfully as an indirect method of evaluating depth of polymerization of

It seems that water molecules may interfere with entanglement of polymer chains and thereby change the physical characteristics of the resultant polymer. 7 The resistance to these changes has been shown to reduce when cross-linked resins are used in preference to linear linkage polymers since they have improved physical properties and are more superior to conventional denture base resins. Sodium hypochlorite (0.525%) and chlorhexidine (4%) were selected as they have proved efficient by not altering the physical properties of resins much. When the repeated hardness measurements of the same specimens (before and after disinfection) were compared (Table 1,2) a slight but significant decrease in hardness was observed immedia- tely after disinfection. However the decrease in hardness resulting from disinfection procedures was significantly reversed after 15 days of storage in water. It is presumable that these processes could help overcome any possible adverse effect of the disinfectant solutions on the surface hardness of acrylic resins. Results from Table 1 and 2 showed no significant differ- ence between both the resins (P>0.05). In conventional resin, the increase in hardness after polymerization could be due to the presence of varying amounts of unreacted residual monomer. Acrylic resin, being a polar material,

effectively absorbs water by diffusion. Immediately after

denture base resin materials.

  • 2 polymerization, 2 processes reduce the concentration of residual monomer, first, diffusion from the polymer and further polymerization at the site of polymer radicals in the matrix and secondly, since water molecules act as a plasti- cizer, it facilitates the flow of long chain polymers thus

Hardness has been found to

be sensitive to residual monomer content in the polyme-

rized resin. It is probable that residual monomer adversely affects properties of resins by plasticizing effect, which effectively reduces interchain forces causing deformation

3

1

under load. Residual monomer is the primary cause of allergy to the mucous membrane. Increased temperatures and extended polymerization times have shown decrease in residual monomer content. Tsuchiya et al., demonstrated that the residual monomer content of denture base materials is lowered to a quarter of the initial value if the denture is immersed in water at 50ºC for 1 hour after polymerization. 4

Studies done by Vallittu et al., suggest storing the newly fabricated denture in water at 37ºC for 1 or 2 days before use, as it decreases the amount of residual monomer in the

denture and the release of the same into the saliva. In vivo, the denture base is exposed to a bath of saliva

which results in optimum water saturation. Keeping this in mind, all the test samples were immersed in water for 4 months at 37ºC to provide optimum water saturation in denture base resins. Improvement in the hardness property has been attributed in part to leaching of the residual monomer from the resin. The rate of diffusion of the monomer out of the resin into water decreases progressively and the process is essen- tially complete after approximately 14 days. Another mechanism related to monomer reduction involves further polymerization of the residual monomer due to active radicals remaining in the polymerized acrylic resin. Chemical disinfectants are a recommended method to prevent cross contamination when used after removal and before insertion of prosthesis into the mouth. Studies by Pavarina et al., noticed a continuous decrease in hardness on immersing the denture teeth in water and also in disinfecting solutions. This permits the relaxation of stre-

sses incurred during polymerization.

increasing the degree of polymerization. High impact resin (Lucitone 199) primarily contains pre polymerized poly methyl methacrylate (PMMA) powder, methyl methacrylate (MMA) monomer and cross linking agent ethylene glycol dimethacrylate (EGDMA). EGDMA is chemically and structurally similar to MMA and may be incorporated in the growing chain itself, facilitating the interlinking of two adjacent chains. This assures a greater interlinking of polymer chains and increases the strength

8

and stiffness of the resultant resin. A significant difference was seen between the two disinfe-

  • 5 ctants (P<0.05). For both resins, all specimens showed a slight but significant decrease in hardness values after immersion in sodium hypochlorite. It may be assumed that the sodium hypochlorite solution may have penetrated into the tested materials and resulted in softening. Asad et al., reported significant decrease in hardness when specimens were immersed in 0.5% chlorhexidine glucon-

7

ate solution for 7 days. This change was related to the slow absorption of the disinfecting chemicals into the resin resulting in some structural change in the polymer.

In the present study, 4% chlorhexidine gluconate solution was used for disinfection. Therefore the decrease in hardn- ess for both the resins may be attributed to the high conc- entration (4%) of chlorhexidine gluconate. The use of this concentration was based on a previous study that evaluated the clinical effectiveness of an infection control protocol for cleansing and disinfecting removable dental prosth- eses. The authors observed that 4% chlorhexidine glucon- ate was effective when immersed for 10 minutes in reduc-

9

ing the number of micro-organisms on the dentures.

  • 6 For both the materials tested, the decrease in hardness was

111
111

ATTENTION!

TRIAL LIMITATION - ONLY 3 SELECTED PAGES MAY BE CONVERTED PER CONVERSION.

PURCHASING A LICENSE REMOVES THIS LIMITATION. TO DO SO, PLEASE CLICK ON THE FOLLOWING LINK: