One-year clinical performance of a self-etching adhesive in class V resin composites cured by two methods

W. W. Brackett, D. A. Covey, H. A. St. Germain

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

97 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This study evaluated the clinical performance of a self-etching adhesive for resin composites over one year. Thirty pairs of restorations of Pertac II, using the adhesive Prompt L-Pop, were placed in caries-free cervical erosion/abfraction lesions without tooth preparation. One of each pair was cured using "soft-start" polymerization, while the other was polymerized with high-intensity halogen light. Restorations were clinically evaluated at baseline, six and 12 months using modified Ryge/USPHS criteria. Although no significant difference (p>0.05) was observed between the curing methods, adhesive performance was poor, with a 35% loss of restorations overall.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)218-222
Number of pages5
JournalOperative Dentistry
Volume27
Issue number3
StatePublished - May 1 2002

Fingerprint

Composite Resins
Adhesives
Root Caries
Tooth Preparation
Halogens
United States Public Health Service
Polymerization
Light

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)
  • Dentistry(all)

Cite this

One-year clinical performance of a self-etching adhesive in class V resin composites cured by two methods. / Brackett, W. W.; Covey, D. A.; St. Germain, H. A.

In: Operative Dentistry, Vol. 27, No. 3, 01.05.2002, p. 218-222.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{9af3ca7226834c1498dc1b20d33f39d0,
title = "One-year clinical performance of a self-etching adhesive in class V resin composites cured by two methods",
abstract = "This study evaluated the clinical performance of a self-etching adhesive for resin composites over one year. Thirty pairs of restorations of Pertac II, using the adhesive Prompt L-Pop, were placed in caries-free cervical erosion/abfraction lesions without tooth preparation. One of each pair was cured using {"}soft-start{"} polymerization, while the other was polymerized with high-intensity halogen light. Restorations were clinically evaluated at baseline, six and 12 months using modified Ryge/USPHS criteria. Although no significant difference (p>0.05) was observed between the curing methods, adhesive performance was poor, with a 35{\%} loss of restorations overall.",
author = "Brackett, {W. W.} and Covey, {D. A.} and {St. Germain}, {H. A.}",
year = "2002",
month = "5",
day = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "27",
pages = "218--222",
journal = "Operative Dentistry",
issn = "0361-7734",
publisher = "Indiana University School of Dentistry",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - One-year clinical performance of a self-etching adhesive in class V resin composites cured by two methods

AU - Brackett, W. W.

AU - Covey, D. A.

AU - St. Germain, H. A.

PY - 2002/5/1

Y1 - 2002/5/1

N2 - This study evaluated the clinical performance of a self-etching adhesive for resin composites over one year. Thirty pairs of restorations of Pertac II, using the adhesive Prompt L-Pop, were placed in caries-free cervical erosion/abfraction lesions without tooth preparation. One of each pair was cured using "soft-start" polymerization, while the other was polymerized with high-intensity halogen light. Restorations were clinically evaluated at baseline, six and 12 months using modified Ryge/USPHS criteria. Although no significant difference (p>0.05) was observed between the curing methods, adhesive performance was poor, with a 35% loss of restorations overall.

AB - This study evaluated the clinical performance of a self-etching adhesive for resin composites over one year. Thirty pairs of restorations of Pertac II, using the adhesive Prompt L-Pop, were placed in caries-free cervical erosion/abfraction lesions without tooth preparation. One of each pair was cured using "soft-start" polymerization, while the other was polymerized with high-intensity halogen light. Restorations were clinically evaluated at baseline, six and 12 months using modified Ryge/USPHS criteria. Although no significant difference (p>0.05) was observed between the curing methods, adhesive performance was poor, with a 35% loss of restorations overall.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0036580872&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0036580872&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 27

SP - 218

EP - 222

JO - Operative Dentistry

JF - Operative Dentistry

SN - 0361-7734

IS - 3

ER -