Akademik Veri Yönetim Sistemi
European Journal of Dentistry, cilt.6, sa.1, ss.79-86, 2012 (Scopus)
Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate surface roughness and hardness of a nanofiller GIC, a resin-modified GIC, three conventional GICs, and a silver-reinforced GIC. Methods: For each material, 11 specimens were prepared and then stored in distilled water at 37 °C for 24 h. The surface roughness of 5 specimens was measured using a surface profilometer before polishing and after polishing with coarse, medium, fine, superfine aluminum oxide abrasive Sof-Lex discs respectively. The hardness of the upper surfaces of the remaining 6 specimens was measured with a Vickers microhardness measuring instrument. Results: All tested GICs showed lower surface roughness values after the polishing procedure. Surface finish of nanofiller GIC was smoother than the other tested GICs after polishing. This was followed by resin-modified GIC, Fuji II LC; then silver-reinforced GIC, Argion Molar, conventional GICs, Aqua Ionofil Plus, Fuji IX, and Ionofil Molar, respectively. The result of the hardness test indicated that the microhardness value of silver-reinforced GIC was greater than that of the other GICs. When the hardness values of all tested GICs were compared, the differences between materials (except Aqua Ionofil Plus with Ionofil Molar and Ketac N100 with Fuji II LC (P>.05)) were found statistically significant (P<.05). Conclusions: According to the results of this study, it can be concluded that the differences in the composition of GICs may affect their surface roughness and hardness.