The Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) approach was suggested to be a suitable method to treat enamel and dentine carious lesions in patients with disabilities. The use of a restorative glass-ionomer with optimal mechanical properties is, therefore, very important.Objective:To test the null-hypotheses that no difference in diametral tensile, compressive and flexural strengths exists between: (1) The EQUIA system and (2) The Chemfil Rock (encapsulated glass-ionomers; test materials) and the Fuji 9 Gold Label and the Ketac Molar Easymix (hand-mixed conventional glass-ionomers; control materials); (3) The EQUIA system and Chemfil Rock. Material and Methods:Specimens for testing flexural (n=240) and diametral tensile (n=80) strengths were prepared according to standardized specifications; the compressive strength (n=80) was measured using a tooth-model of a class II ART restoration. ANOVA and Tukey B tests were used to test for significant differences between dependent and independent variables. Results:The EQUIA system and Chemfil Rock had significantly higher mean scores for all the three strength variables than the Fuji 9 Gold Label and Ketac Molar Easymix (α=0.05). The EQUIA system had significant higher mean scores for diametral tensile and flexural strengths than the Chemfil Rock (α=0.05). Conclusion:The two encapsulated high-viscosity glass-ionomers had significantly higher test values for diametral tensile, flexural and compressive strengths than the commonly used hand-mixed high-viscosity glass-ionomers.

Patients with disability, many of whom have difficulty coping with CRT, may benefit from the ART approach.

Adding heat to glass ionomers during setting might improve mechanical properties. The aim was to compare the biaxial flexural strength (BFS) between and within four glass ionomers, by time of exposure to a high-intensity LED light-curing unit. Materials and methods. Samples of Fuji 9 Gold Label, Ketac Molar Easymix, ChemFil Rock, and the EQUIA system were divided into three treatment groups (n = 30): without heating (Group 1), heated with LED lamp of 1400 mW/cm2 for 30 s while setting (Group 2), and heated with LED lamp of 1400 mW/cm2 for 60 s while setting (Group 3). Samples were stored for 48 hours in distilled water at 37°C until tested. BFS was tested, using a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min. Data were analyzed, using ANOVA test with the Bonferroni correction (α = 0.05). Heating the glass-ionomer cements with an LED curing light of 1400 mW/cm2 during setting for 30 s increased the BFS value of all GICs. No statistically significant difference in mean BFS scores was found between the EQUIA system and ChemFil Rock at 30 s and 60 s. The mean BFS value was statistically significantly higher for the EQUIA system and ChemFil Rock than for Fuji 9 Gold Label and Ketac Molar Easymix at all exposure times.

BackgroundProviding restorative treatment for persons with disability may be challenging and has been related to the patient’s ability to cope with the anxiety engendered by treatment and to cooperate fully with the demands of the clinical situation. The aim of the present study was to assess the survival rate of ART restorations compared to conventional restorations in people with disability referred for special care dentistry.MethodsThree treatment protocols were distinguished: ART (hand instruments/high-viscosity glass-ionomer); conventional restorative treatment (rotary instrumentation/resin composite) in the clinic (CRT/clinic) and under general anaesthesia (CRT/GA). Patients were referred for restorative care to a special care centre and treated by one of two specialists. Patients and/or their caregivers were provided with written and verbal information regarding the proposed techniques, and selected the type of treatment they were to receive. Treatment was provided as selected but if this option proved clinically unfeasible one of the alternative techniques was subsequently proposed. Evaluation of restoration survival was performed by two independent trained and calibrated examiners using established ART restoration assessment codes at 6 months and 12 months. The Proportional Hazard model with frailty corrections was applied to calculate survival estimates over a one year period.Results66 patients (13.6 ± 7.8 years) with 16 different medical disorders participated. CRT/clinic proved feasible for 5 patients (7.5%), the ART approach for 47 patients (71.2%), and 14 patients received CRT/GA (21.2%). In all, 298 dentine carious lesions were restored in primary and permanent teeth, 182 (ART), 21 (CRT/clinic) and 95 (CRT/GA). The 1-year survival rates and jackknife standard error of ART and CRT restorations were 97.8 ± 1.0% and 90.5 ± 3.2%, respectively (p = 0.01).ConclusionsThese short-term results indicate that ART appears to be an effective treatment protocol for treating patients with disability restoratively, many of whom have difficulty coping with the conventional restorative treatment.Trial registration numberNetherlands Trial Registration: NTR 4400

Objectives This study compared the surface gloss (SG), gloss retention (GR), and color stability (CS) of 2 universal resin composites after chemical (CA) and mechanical (MA) aging. Materials and Methods Twenty disc-shaped samples of G-ænial A´Chord (GC-Europe) and Filtek Universal (3M-ESPE) were polished with sequential abrasive papers. For CA, specimens were stored in 1 mL of 75% ethanol for 15 days at 37°C, and readings (SG, GR, and CS) were obtained at baseline and 5, 10, and 15 days. For MA, specimens were subjected to 10,750 simulated brushing cycles. SG and CS were evaluated after every 3,583 cycles. SG was measured with a glossmeter (geometrical configuration: 60°), and values were expressed in gloss units. Color was measured with a spectrophotometer using the CIE-L*a*b* color system. The Student’s t -test, 1-way analysis of variance, and Scheffé test were used for statistical analysis (α = 0.05). Results G-ænial presented significantly higher SG values than Filtek ( p = 0.02), with GR reductions of 5.2% (CA) and 5.3% (MA) for G-ænial and 7.6% (CA) and 7.2% (MA) for Filtek. The aging protocol had no statistically significant effect on SG or GR ( p = 0.25) from baseline to the final readings. G-ænial–MA presented the lowest color difference (∆E = 1.8), and G-ænial–CA and Filtek–CA had the largest changes ( ∆E = 8.6 and ∆E = 11.8, respectively). Conclusion G-ænial presented higher SG values and better CS. Both restorative materials demonstrated acceptable GR and CS. Aging protocols impacted these properties negatively.