Show simple item record

The In Vivo Wear Resistance of 12 Composite Resins

dc.contributor.authorLang, Brien R.en_US
dc.contributor.authorBloem, Thomas J.en_US
dc.contributor.authorPowers, John M.en_US
dc.contributor.authorWang, Rui-Fengen_US
dc.date.accessioned2010-06-01T19:49:40Z
dc.date.available2010-06-01T19:49:40Z
dc.date.issued1992-09en_US
dc.identifier.citationLang, Brien R.; Bloem, Thomas J.; Powers, John M.; Wang, Rui-Feng (1992). "The In Vivo Wear Resistance of 12 Composite Resins." Journal of Prosthodontics 1(1): 2-10. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/72960>en_US
dc.identifier.issn1059-941Xen_US
dc.identifier.issn1532-849Xen_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/72960
dc.identifier.urihttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=retrieve&db=pubmed&list_uids=1308215&dopt=citationen_US
dc.description.abstract: The in vivo wear resistance of 12 composite resins were compared with an amalgam control using the Latin Square experimental design. Sixteen edentulous patients wearing specially designed complete dentures formed the experimental population. Materials and Methods : The Michigan Computer Graphics Measurement System was used to digitize the surface of the control and composite resin samples before and after 3-month test periods to obtain wear data. The 12 composite resins selected for this investigation based on their published composite classification types were seven fine particle composites, three blends, and two microfilled composite resins. The Latin Square experimental design was found to be valid with the factor of material being statistically different at the 5% level of significance. Wear was computed as volume loss (mm 3 /mm 2 ), and all of the composites studied had more wear than the amalgam control ( P = .001). Results : After 3 months, the mean (error) of wear of the amalgam was 0.028 (0.006). Means (error) of wear for the 12 composites were ranked from most to least wear by mean wear volume loss. Conclusions : The absence of any relationship between mean wear volume loss and the volume percentage filler was confirmed by the correlation coefficient r = -0.158.en_US
dc.format.extent739680 bytes
dc.format.extent3109 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.format.mimetypetext/plain
dc.publisherBlackwell Publishing Ltden_US
dc.rights1992 by the American College of Prosthodontistsen_US
dc.subject.otherCompositesen_US
dc.subject.otherFiller Particlesen_US
dc.subject.otherIn Vivo Wearen_US
dc.titleThe In Vivo Wear Resistance of 12 Composite Resinsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelDentistryen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciencesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationum* Professor and Chair, Department of Prosthodontics, the University of Michigan, School of Dentistry, Ann Arbor, MI.en_US
dc.contributor.affiliationum† Assistant Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, the University of Michigan, School of Dentistry, Ann Arbor, MI.en_US
dc.contributor.affiliationum§ Research Associate I. Prosthodontic Research Laboratory, the University of Michigan, School of Dentistry. Ann Arbor. MI.en_US
dc.contributor.affiliationother† Professor and Chair. Department of Oral Biomaterials, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, TX.en_US
dc.identifier.pmid1308215en_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/72960/1/j.1532-849X.1992.tb00419.x.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/j.1532-849X.1992.tb00419.xen_US
dc.identifier.sourceJournal of Prosthodonticsen_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBrÅnemark P-I, Zarb GA, Albrektsson T, ( eds ): Tissue-Integrated Prostheses: Osscointegration in Clinical Dentistry. Chicago, IL, Quintessence, 1985, pp 117 – 128.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBrÅnemark P-I: Biological principles relative to Osseointegrated implants. Continuing Education Course, October, 1985, Rochester, MN.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSkalak R: Biomechanical considerations in osseointegrated prostheses. J Prosthet Dent 1983; 49: 843 – 848.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRangert B, Jemt T, Jorneus L: Forces and moments on branemark implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Impl 1990; 4: 241 – 247.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSchiffleger BE, Ziebert GJ, Dhuru VB, et al: Comparison of accuracy of multi unit one-piece castings. J Prosthet Dent 1985; 54: 770 – 776.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGegauff AG, Rosenstiel SF: The seating of one-piece and soldered fixed partial dentures. J Prosthet Dent 1989; 62: 292 – 297.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJemt T, Carlsson L, Boss A, et al: In vivo load measurements on osscointegrated implants supporting fixed or removable prostheses: A comparative pilot study. Int J Maxillofac Impl 1991; 6: 413 – 417.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDedmon HW: Disparity in expert opinion on size of acceptable margin openings. Oper Dent 1982; 7: 97 – 101.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceZarb GA: Personal communication, Dec 8, 1991.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJemt T: Failures and complications in 391 consecutively inserted fixed prostheses supported by Branemark Implants in Edentulous Jaws: A study of treatment from the time of prosthesis placement to the first annual checkup. Int J Oral Maxillofac Impl 1991; 6: 270 – 276.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCox JF, Zarb GA: The longitudinal clinical efficacy of osseointegrated dental implants: A three-year report. Int J Oral Maxillofac Impl 1987; 2: 91 – 100.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencevan Steenberghe D, Lockholm U, Bolender C, et al: The applicability of osseointegrated oral implants in the rehabilitation of partial edentulism: A prospective multicenter study on 550 fixtures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Impl 1990; 5: 272 – 281.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWhite G: Academy of Osscointegration Annual Session Lecture. Dallas, TX, February 1990.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCarr AB: A Comparison of impression techniques for a five-implant mandibular model. Int J Oral Maxillofac Impl 1991; 6: 448 – 455.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCarr AB, Brunski JB, Luby ML: Preload and load-sharing of strain-gaged CP-Ti implant components. J Dent Res 1992; 71: 528 ( abstr 106 ).en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceStanford CM, Keller JC: The concept of osscointegration and bone matrix expression. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med 1991; 2: 83 – 101.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRubin CT, McLeod KJ: Dynamic strain history as a determinant of bone morphology. J Dent Res 1991; 70: 430 ( abstr 1310A ).en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCraig RG: Restorative Dental Materials. St Louis, MO, Mosby, 1989, p 369.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreference19. Dental Arts Laboratories, Inc: Implant and Spark Erosion Prosthetic Services. Marketing Brochure, May 1991.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBergman GF: Laser welding of titanium frameworks. Lecture presentation, Academy of Osseointegration Annual Session, Vancouver, BC, February 1992.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHuling JS, Clark RE: Comparative distortion in three-unit fixed protheses joined by laser welding, conventional soldering, or casting in one piece. J Dent Res 1977; 56: 128 – 134.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSellers GC: Direct assembly framework for osseointegrated implant prosthesis. J Prosthet Dent 1989; 62: 662 – 668.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceVoitik AJ: A direct assembly framework method for osseointegrated implant prostheses. The Implant Society 1991; 2: 11 – 14.en_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe its collections in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in them. We encourage you to Contact Us anonymously if you encounter harmful or problematic language in catalog records or finding aids. More information about our policies and practices is available at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.