Effects of repeated fluoride varnish application on different restorative surfaces

Fouad S. Salama, K. Marche Schulte, Michael F. Iseman, John William Reinhardt

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Aim: The aim of this study was to assess the effect of repeated (twice) applications of two fluoride varnishes (Duraflor and CavityShield) on the surface micromorphology of a high-viscosity glass ionomer (Fuji IX GP), a compomer (F2000), and a flowable composite (Filtek™ Flow) using a profilometer and scanning electron microscope (SEM). Methods and Materials: Fifteen specimens were prepared from each material, surface roughness (R a) was measured with a profilometer, and an impression was made for epoxy replicas. The fluoride varnishes were applied to the experimental specimens of each material at repeated intervals of 48 hours. For all specimens, Ra was measured and SEM replicas were examined. Results: The final Ra of glass ionomer was 3.49 ± 0.59 (mean ± SD) for CavityShield, 4.69 ± 1.33 for Duraflor, and 2.96 ± 1.53 for the controls. The final Ra of flowable composite was 0.53 ± 0.20 for CavityShield, 2.61 ± 3.08 for Duraflor, and 0.15 ± 0.09 for controls. For glass ionomer and flowable composite, Duraflor was associated with a significantly higher roughness at the final measurement compared to controls (P < 0.05). SEM micrographs showed differing surface topographies which in many specimens confirmed Ra analysis. Conclusion: Fuji IX GP and Filtek™ Flow showed significantly higher roughness after two applications of Duraflor compared to controls.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)54-61
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Contemporary Dental Practice
Volume7
Issue number5
StatePublished - Nov 1 2006

Fingerprint

Topical Fluorides
Electrons
Compomers
Viscosity
Duraflor
glass ionomer
flowable hybrid composite

Keywords

  • Compomers
  • Flowable composite
  • Fluoride varnishes
  • Glass ionomer
  • R
  • Surface roughness

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Dentistry(all)

Cite this

Effects of repeated fluoride varnish application on different restorative surfaces. / Salama, Fouad S.; Schulte, K. Marche; Iseman, Michael F.; Reinhardt, John William.

In: Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice, Vol. 7, No. 5, 01.11.2006, p. 54-61.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Salama, Fouad S. ; Schulte, K. Marche ; Iseman, Michael F. ; Reinhardt, John William. / Effects of repeated fluoride varnish application on different restorative surfaces. In: Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice. 2006 ; Vol. 7, No. 5. pp. 54-61.
@article{df0562f66a224e76893c6a402624f5e0,
title = "Effects of repeated fluoride varnish application on different restorative surfaces",
abstract = "Aim: The aim of this study was to assess the effect of repeated (twice) applications of two fluoride varnishes (Duraflor and CavityShield) on the surface micromorphology of a high-viscosity glass ionomer (Fuji IX GP), a compomer (F2000), and a flowable composite (Filtek™ Flow) using a profilometer and scanning electron microscope (SEM). Methods and Materials: Fifteen specimens were prepared from each material, surface roughness (R a) was measured with a profilometer, and an impression was made for epoxy replicas. The fluoride varnishes were applied to the experimental specimens of each material at repeated intervals of 48 hours. For all specimens, Ra was measured and SEM replicas were examined. Results: The final Ra of glass ionomer was 3.49 ± 0.59 (mean ± SD) for CavityShield, 4.69 ± 1.33 for Duraflor, and 2.96 ± 1.53 for the controls. The final Ra of flowable composite was 0.53 ± 0.20 for CavityShield, 2.61 ± 3.08 for Duraflor, and 0.15 ± 0.09 for controls. For glass ionomer and flowable composite, Duraflor was associated with a significantly higher roughness at the final measurement compared to controls (P < 0.05). SEM micrographs showed differing surface topographies which in many specimens confirmed Ra analysis. Conclusion: Fuji IX GP and Filtek™ Flow showed significantly higher roughness after two applications of Duraflor compared to controls.",
keywords = "Compomers, Flowable composite, Fluoride varnishes, Glass ionomer, R, Surface roughness",
author = "Salama, {Fouad S.} and Schulte, {K. Marche} and Iseman, {Michael F.} and Reinhardt, {John William}",
year = "2006",
month = "11",
day = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "7",
pages = "54--61",
journal = "Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice",
issn = "1526-3711",
publisher = "Procter & Gamble Co.",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Effects of repeated fluoride varnish application on different restorative surfaces

AU - Salama, Fouad S.

AU - Schulte, K. Marche

AU - Iseman, Michael F.

AU - Reinhardt, John William

PY - 2006/11/1

Y1 - 2006/11/1

N2 - Aim: The aim of this study was to assess the effect of repeated (twice) applications of two fluoride varnishes (Duraflor and CavityShield) on the surface micromorphology of a high-viscosity glass ionomer (Fuji IX GP), a compomer (F2000), and a flowable composite (Filtek™ Flow) using a profilometer and scanning electron microscope (SEM). Methods and Materials: Fifteen specimens were prepared from each material, surface roughness (R a) was measured with a profilometer, and an impression was made for epoxy replicas. The fluoride varnishes were applied to the experimental specimens of each material at repeated intervals of 48 hours. For all specimens, Ra was measured and SEM replicas were examined. Results: The final Ra of glass ionomer was 3.49 ± 0.59 (mean ± SD) for CavityShield, 4.69 ± 1.33 for Duraflor, and 2.96 ± 1.53 for the controls. The final Ra of flowable composite was 0.53 ± 0.20 for CavityShield, 2.61 ± 3.08 for Duraflor, and 0.15 ± 0.09 for controls. For glass ionomer and flowable composite, Duraflor was associated with a significantly higher roughness at the final measurement compared to controls (P < 0.05). SEM micrographs showed differing surface topographies which in many specimens confirmed Ra analysis. Conclusion: Fuji IX GP and Filtek™ Flow showed significantly higher roughness after two applications of Duraflor compared to controls.

AB - Aim: The aim of this study was to assess the effect of repeated (twice) applications of two fluoride varnishes (Duraflor and CavityShield) on the surface micromorphology of a high-viscosity glass ionomer (Fuji IX GP), a compomer (F2000), and a flowable composite (Filtek™ Flow) using a profilometer and scanning electron microscope (SEM). Methods and Materials: Fifteen specimens were prepared from each material, surface roughness (R a) was measured with a profilometer, and an impression was made for epoxy replicas. The fluoride varnishes were applied to the experimental specimens of each material at repeated intervals of 48 hours. For all specimens, Ra was measured and SEM replicas were examined. Results: The final Ra of glass ionomer was 3.49 ± 0.59 (mean ± SD) for CavityShield, 4.69 ± 1.33 for Duraflor, and 2.96 ± 1.53 for the controls. The final Ra of flowable composite was 0.53 ± 0.20 for CavityShield, 2.61 ± 3.08 for Duraflor, and 0.15 ± 0.09 for controls. For glass ionomer and flowable composite, Duraflor was associated with a significantly higher roughness at the final measurement compared to controls (P < 0.05). SEM micrographs showed differing surface topographies which in many specimens confirmed Ra analysis. Conclusion: Fuji IX GP and Filtek™ Flow showed significantly higher roughness after two applications of Duraflor compared to controls.

KW - Compomers

KW - Flowable composite

KW - Fluoride varnishes

KW - Glass ionomer

KW - R

KW - Surface roughness

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33750958479&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33750958479&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 17091140

AN - SCOPUS:33750958479

VL - 7

SP - 54

EP - 61

JO - Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

JF - Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

SN - 1526-3711

IS - 5

ER -