Comparative evaluation of compressive strength and surface microhardness of EQUIA Forte, resin-modified glass-ionomer cement with conventional glass-ionomer cement

Purpose: The study aimed to evaluate and compare the compressive strength and surface microhardness of EQUIA Forte, light cure, and conventional glass-ionomer cement (GIC). Methodology: Fifty-four pellets of G-Coat (GC) Gold Label 2, GC Gold Label light-cured universal restorative material, and EQUI...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inJournal of the Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry Vol. 37; no. 3; pp. 265 - 270
Main Authors Poornima, P, Koley, Paromita, Kenchappa, Mallikarjuna, Nagaveni, N, Bharath, Kashetty, Neena, Indavara
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Chandigarh Wolters Kluwer India Pvt. Ltd 01.07.2019
Medknow Publications and Media Pvt. Ltd
Medknow Publications & Media Pvt. Ltd
Subjects
Acids
Analysis
Cement
Dental cement
Dentin
Labels
Lactic acid
Light emitting diodes
Mechanical properties
Physical properties
Saliva
Shear strength
Studies
Water
conventional glass-ionomer cement
Compressive strength
surface microhardness
EQUIA Forte
resin-modified glass-ionomer cement
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:Purpose: The study aimed to evaluate and compare the compressive strength and surface microhardness of EQUIA Forte, light cure, and conventional glass-ionomer cement (GIC). Methodology: Fifty-four pellets of G-Coat (GC) Gold Label 2, GC Gold Label light-cured universal restorative material, and EQUIA Forte GIC were prepared of dimensions (6 × 4) mm and were divided into three groups (18) each and were stored at 37°C for 1 h and then immersed in 20 ml of deionized water, artificial saliva, and lactic acid six each, respectively, over 30 days. Samples were subjected to surface microhardness and compressive strength test on the 1st day, 7th day, and 30th day. Results were subjected to ANOVA and Bonferroni post hoc test. Results: Comparing the compressive strength of EQUIA Forte from day 1 to 30 when placed in artificial saliva, there was a significant increase on day 30 (P = 0.007); compared to other groups. The surface microhardness of EQUIA Forte from day 1 to 30 when placed in artificial saliva nonsignificantly decreased comparing to other groups. Conclusion: Surface microhardness and compressive strength of EQUIA Forte were significantly high in comparison to the other groups.
ISSN:0970-4388
1998-3905
DOI:10.4103/JISPPD.JISPPD_342_18