Resilient denture base materials

Bascom, Perry W.

doi:10.1016/0022-3913(66)90143-0

Cited by 40 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, MB performs better in lining design 1. However, MB in lining design 1 affects the force of mastication because the patient experiences a ‘rubber ball’ effect during chewing when 1·5 mm elastic materials such as silicone rubber are used (Bascom, 1966).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of lining design of three processed soft denture liners on cushioning effect

Kawano

Ohguri

Koran

et al. 1999

J of Oral Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the influence of the lining design of a soft denture liner on its cushioning effect, using a free drop test and an accelerometer. The peak instantaneous acceleration value was computed. The materials tested were SuperSoft(R) (SS), Kurepeet-Dough(R) (KD), and Molloplast-B(R) (MB). Soft denture liners 2 mm in thickness were placed in test denture bases using three different configurations. Specimens were tested at 24 h and at 180 days after storage in distilled water at 37 degrees C. A three-way ANOVA was used to analyse the data (P=0.05) and Tukey intervals were computed. It was found that all three materials were effective in reducing the impact force. The lining design that had the soft denture liner extended to the periphery of the denture base demonstrated the greatest shock absorbability of all the tested designs. A silicone denture liner using lining design 1 was the most effective in reducing the shock transmitted to the denture bases.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of lining design of three processed soft denture liners on cushioning effect

Kawano

Ohguri

Koran

et al. 1999

J of Oral Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Estos materiales son adecuados para tratamiento de pacientes con reabsorción ósea, atrofia del reborde residual, mucosa relativamente fina y no resiliente, reborde de tipo «afilado», bruxismo, xerostomía, y cuando las dentaduras se oponen a dentición natural [2][3][4] . Los materiales resilientes son clasificados básicamente en dos grupos: materiales a base de elastómeros de silicona y a base de resina acrílica 5,6 . Los materiales a base de elastómeros de silicona presentan en su composición polímero de dimetil siloxano 7 , y los materiales a base de resina acrílica están compuestos por polvo conteniendo polímeros y copolímeros, además de un líquido conteniendo monómero acrílico y plastificante.8 Algunos materiales para rebasados resilientes a base de resina acrílica no presentan ligaciones cruzadas después de la polimerización.…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

Influencia del tiempo de almacenamiento sobre la dureza y rugosidad de materiales para rebasados resilentes

Goiato

Santos²,

Falcón-Antenucci³

et al. 2007

RCOE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Resumen:Fundamento: Los materiales para rebasados resilentes de prótesis, presentan ciertas características clínicamente importantes que pueden alterarse con el tiempo de uso, entre ellas la dureza, y rugosidad. El objetivo de este estudio fue evaluar la influencia del almacenamiento sobre la dureza Shore A y rugosidad de cuatro materiales resilentes para rebasado. Materiales y método: Fueron utilizados 4 materiales resilentes: Dentuflex, Coe-Soft, Dentusoft y Dinabase, 3 temporales y un permanente; para cada material fueron confeccionadas 7 muestras. Se evaluó la dureza y rugosidad inicialmente, a los 30 y 90 días de almacenamiento en agua destilada a 35±2ºC. Los resultados fueron sometidos al análisis de varianza (ANOVA) y las medias comparadas por el Test de Tukey (p<0,05). Resultados: Dentuflex, Coe-Soft, Dentusoft y Dinabase presentaron los mayores valores medios iniciales de dureza, en este orden. Con respecto a la rugosidad, Dentuflex, Dentusoft, Coe-Soft y Dinabase presentaron los mayores valores medios iniciales. Después del periodo de almacenamiento se observó un aumento significativo de los valores de dureza en todos los materiales. El material Dentuflex presentó valores de rugosidad significativamente menores, mientras que los valores de los otros materiales aumentaron significativamente. Conclusión: El tiempo de almacenamiento influenció sobre la dureza y rugosidad todos los materiales.Palabras clave: Materiales resilentes. Dureza. Rugosidad. Abstract: Statement of problem:Resilient soft liners materials have many important features that could be altered over time, like hardness and roughness. The aim of this study was to assess the influence of water storage on the hardness Shore A and roughness of four resilient soft liners materials. Materials and methods: Four materials were used: Dentuflex, Coe-Soft, Dentusoft and Dinabase, three temporary and one permanent material. For each material 7 specimens were made. The hardness and the roughness were evaluated in the initial period, after 30 and 90 days of distilled water storage at 35±2ºC. The results were submitted to analyses of variance (ANOVA) and the averages compared by Tukey's Test (p<0.05). Results: Dentuflex, Coe-Soft, Dentusoft and Dinabase displayed higher initial average of hardness values, whereas Dentuflex, Dentusoft, Coe-Soft and Dinabase higher initial average of roughness values. After water storage a significant increase in the hardness values in all materials was observed. Dentuflex material showed smaller roughness values, while the other materials increased significantly. Conclusion: Time storage influenced all the materials analyzed with respect to hardness and roughness.

show abstract

“…Compromised alveolar support, 1–4 whether congenital or acquired, increases the technical difficulty in construction as well as the subsequent use of a removable prosthesis. When a denture is made and still does not meet the needs of a patient due to morphological or physical issues, a resilient denture liner (RDL) may be an effective solution 5–11 …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some investigators theorize that a laboratory‐processed RDL exhibits more complete polymerization than a chairside RDL, providing increased resistance to solubility in oral fluids and improved physical and mechanical properties 17,18 . Laboratory studies in which acrylic‐based soft denture lining materials are immersed in distilled water, artificial saliva, or denture cleansers show a smaller reduction in flexibility compared with clinical studies that are characterized by a more rapid and pronounced reduction in compliance 6–10 …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Compliance of Resilient Denture Liners Immersed in Effervescent Denture Cleansers

Benting

Pesun

Hodges

2005

Journal of Prosthodontics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Resilient denture base materials

Cited by 40 publications

References 4 publications

Influence of lining design of three processed soft denture liners on cushioning effect

Influence of lining design of three processed soft denture liners on cushioning effect

Influencia del tiempo de almacenamiento sobre la dureza y rugosidad de materiales para rebasados resilentes

Compliance of Resilient Denture Liners Immersed in Effervescent Denture Cleansers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About