Comparison of wear-resistance of class V restorative materials

Kevin B. Frazier, Frederick A. Rueggeberg, Donald J. Mettenburg

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

14 Scopus citations


Compomers and resin-modified glass ionomers have been developed to improve the physical properties of traditional glass ionomer cements. This project compared the toothbrush wear-resistance of three compomers (Compoglass, Dyract, Hytac) and three resin-modified glass ionomer restorative materials (Fuji II LC, Photac-Fil, Vitremer) to that of two resin-based composites (Herculite XRV, Silux Plus). Specimens (n = 7) were prepared according to manufacturers’ instructions and stored in a humidor for 48 hours prior to testing. The specimens were subjected to 120,000 strokes at 1.5 Hz, using a brush-head force of 200 g on a Manly V-8 cross-brushing machine. The slurry contained a 50:50 (w/w) mixture of toothpaste and deionized water. Abrasion-resistance was calculated by measuring specimen mass-loss prior to and subsequent to brushing. The data were analyzed using a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the Tukey-Kramer post-hoc test. Significant differences (p±.0001) in mass-loss were found, and loss ranged from 0.013 ± 0.003 g (Hytac) to 0.061 ± 0.009 g (Compoglass). No correlation (p=.959) between wear-resistance and experimentally determined filler content existed. This study showed that all but one hybrid resin-ionomer type material exhibited a resistance to toothbrush wear that was as good as or better than that of the two traditional resin-based composite materials.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)309-314
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry
Issue number6
StatePublished - Nov 1998

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Dentistry(all)


Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison of wear-resistance of class V restorative materials'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this