A Different Approach to Analyzing the Surface Roughness of Prosthetic Dental Acrylic Resins

Abstract

(1) Introduction: Apart from the polishing method, conventional or mechanized, the arithmetic mean roughness (Ra) is the most common metric to evaluate the surface roughness of denture base acrylic resins. An overview of the constraints related to this roughness parameter is highlighted in this study. This research introduces new parameters for accessing a functional analysis of surface roughness. (2) Materials and Methods: Five samples of CAD/CAM 3D-printed acrylic resins were prepared. Two polishing techniques, manual and mechanical, were applied. Surface roughness parameters were extracted from a profilometer reading: arithmetic mean height (Ra and Pa), skewness (Rsk and Psk), and kurtosis (Rku and Pku). (3) Results: Significant differences (p < 0.001) were found in the Ra distribution among the study samples, in contrast with the lack of significance in Pa values. Surface roughness parameters revealed an increased coefficient of variance (CV) value due to mechanized polishing across the specimens analyzed. Skewness and kurtosis indicate a more pronounced distribution with the manual polishing technique. (4) Conclusion: This preliminary study exhibits the influence of different polishing protocols on surface roughness parameters. The primary profile, skewness, and kurtosis should be assessed for the surface characterization of acrylic resins.

Influence of different processing techniques for prosthetic acrylic resins in the surface roughness parameters: a research article

“…In terms of analysis of the surface properties, the authors proposed a different approach to the assessment using the following parameters: skewness (Psk), kurtosis (Pku) and arithmetic mean roughness (Pa) [ 14 ]. The validation of the use of Pa instead of Ra, commonly used, had already been demonstrated [ 14 , 19 , 20 ]. The results published by the authors of the present research were reused for the present analysis [ 14 ].…”

“…The validation of the use of Pa instead of Ra, commonly used, had already been demonstrated [ 14 , 19 , 20 ]. The results published by the authors of the present research were reused for the present analysis [ 14 ].…”

“…The surface roughness parameters were directly obtained from the primary profile (Profile P). The use of Profile P is clinically relevant since it represents the curve formed when the actual surface of the material is cross-sectioned, without the use of a Gaussian filter [ 14 ].…”

“…The most common metric used to analyze surface roughness is Ra (arithmetical mean roughness). This parameter summarizes height variations; however, it lacks into surface shape and does not offer details regarding the frequency or regularity of occurrence [ 14 ].…”