<p> Aim: To measure and compare flexural strength, modulus of elasticity and hardness of some of the commercially available CAD/CAM and conventional materials used to fabricate interim fixed dental prostheses. </p><p> Hypotheses: The null hypotheses are: 1-There is no statistical significant deference in the flexural strength among any of the tested materials. 2-There is no statistical significant deference in the modulus of elasticity among any of the tested materials. 3-There is no statistical significant deference in the hardness among any of the tested materials. </p><p> Materials and methods: The preparation and testing was carried out in University at Buffalo, School of Dental medicine and Ivoclar Vivadet R&D lab (Amherst, NY, USA) as MS in Oral Sciences thesis project. </p><p> Material included in the study were Integrity (Dentsply Caulk), Telio CAD, Telio Lab (Ivoclar Vivadent), Jet (Lang Dental) and Tuff Temp (Pulpdent). </p><p> For flexural strength and modulus of elasticity, 10 specimens (2 ± 0.1 mm) x (2 ± 0.1mm) x (25 ± 1.0 mm) and A3 shade (ISO 4049:2009) prepared and subjected to 3 unit bending test until fracture. ANOVA and multiple comparisons done. </p><p> For hardness, rectangular cube specimens were indented 15 times using Vickers hardness testing machine. Kruskal-Wallis nonparametric test was done. </p><p> Results: for flexural strength Integrity and Telio CAD were significantly higher than Telio Lab, Jet and Tuff Temp (p < 0.05). Telio Lab was significantly higher than Jet and Tuff Temp (p < 0.05). There was no statistically significant deference in the flexural strength between Telio CAD and Integrity (p = 0.993) and between Jet and Tuff Temp (p = 0.710). </p><p> For modulus of elasticity Integrity was significantly higher than all other groups (p < 0.05). Telio CAD was significantly higher than Jet and Tuff Temp (p < 0.05). Telio Lab was significantly higher than Jet (p < 0.05). There was no statistically significant differences between Telio Lab and Telio CAD (p = 0.5), between Telio Lab and Tuff Temp (p = 0.318), and between Jet and Tuff Temp (p = 0.873). </p><p> For hardness Jet was significantly lower than all other groups (P > 0.05). Integrity was significantly higher than all other groups (P < 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference among Telio Lab, Telio CAD and Tuff Temp with (p = 1) in all comparisons. </p><p> Conclusions: Integrity scored the highest flexural strength, highest modulus of elasticity, and hardness. The order from highest to lowest flexural strength is: Integrity > Telio CAD > Telio Lab > Jet > Tuff Temp. The order from highest to lowest modulus of elasticity is: Integrity > Telio CAD > Telio Lab > Tuff Temp > Jet. The order from highest to lowest hardness is: Integrity > Telio CAD > Tuff Temp > Telio Lab > Jet.</p><p>
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:PROQUEST/oai:pqdtoai.proquest.com:10930968 |
| Date | 19 October 2018 |
| Creators | Alzahrani, Abdulrahman Hassan |
| Publisher | State University of New York at Buffalo |
| Source Sets | ProQuest.com |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | thesis |
Page generated in 0.0026 seconds