Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

±³µÎº¯À§¿Í ¼±¼öÃà·®ÀÇ ¿¬°ü¼º ºÐ¼®

Correlation between Linear polymerization shrinkage & tooth cuspal deflection

´ëÇÑÄ¡°úº¸Á¸ÇÐȸÁö 2005³â 30±Ç 6È£ p.442 ~ 449
À̼ø¿µ, ¹Ú¼ºÈ£,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
À̼ø¿µ (  ) - ¿¬¼¼´ëÇб³ ÀÇ°ú´ëÇÐ ÇǺΰúÇб³½Ç
¹Ú¼ºÈ£ (  ) - ¿¬¼¼´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ Ä¡°úº¸Á¸Çб³½Ç,

Abstract

ÀÌ ³í¹®ÀÇ ¸ñÀûÀº º¹ÇÕ·¹Áø°ú ÄÄÆ÷¸Ó¿¡¼­, ÁßÇÕ¼öÃàÀÇ ¾ç°ú ÀÌ·Î ÀÎÇÏ¿© ¾ß±âµÇ´Â ±³µÎº¯À§¿ÍÀÇ »ó°ü°ü°è¸¦ ¾Ë¾Æº¸±â À§ÇÔÀÌ´Ù. ¼öº¹Àç·á·Î¼­ Dyract AP, Compoglass F, Z100, Surefil, Pyramid, Synergy Compact, Heliomolar¿Í Heliomolar HB°¡ »ç¿ëµÇ¾úÀ¸¸ç, Á¢ÂøÁ¦·Î¼­´Â SE Bond °¡ »ç¿ëµÇ¾ú´Ù. ¼öº¹Àç·áÀÇ ÁßÇÕ¼öÃàÀÇ ¾çÀ» ÃøÁ¤Çϱâ À§ÇÏ¿©, ÀÚü Á¦ÀÛÇÑ linometer¸¦ »ç¿ëÇÏ¿©, 60ÃÊ°£ ÀϾ´Â ¼±¼öÃà·®À» ÃøÁ¤ÇÏ¿´´Ù. ÇÑ ¼öº¹Àç·á ´ç 10ȸ ÃøÁ¤ÇÏ¿´À¸¸ç, one way ANOVA¿Í »çÈÄ°ËÁ¤¹æ¹ýÀ¸·Î Tukey Test¸¦ ÀÌ¿ëÇÏ¿© $95\%$ ½Å·Ú¼öÁØ¿¡¼­ °¢ ¼öº¹Àç·áÀÇ ÁßÇÕ¼öÃà·®ÀÇ Â÷À̸¦ ºñ±³ÇÏ¿´´Ù. Ä¡¾Æ¿¡¼­ ÀϾ´Â ±³µÎº¯À§ÀÇ ¾çÀ» ÃøÁ¤Çϱâ À§ÇÏ¿© »ç¶÷ÀÇ »ó¾Ç¼Ò±¸Ä¡¿¡ Ç¥ÁØÈ­µÈ MOD ¿Íµ¿À» Çü¼ºÇÏ°í(±íÀÌ 3mm, ³ÐÀÌ 3.5mm), Á¢ÂøÁ¦¸¦ µµÆ÷ÇÑ ÈÄ ±¤Á¶»ç ½ÃŲ ÈÄ, ¼öº¹Àç·á·Î ÃæÀüÇÏ¿´´Ù Ä¡¾Æ¸¦ ÀÚü Á¦ÀÛÇÑ ±³µÎº¯À§ ÃøÁ¤ÀåÄ¡¿¡ À§Ä¡½ÃÅ°°í, ±¤Á¶»ç ½ÃÅ°°í, ÀÌ ¶§ ¹ß»ýÇÏ´Â ±³µÎÀÇ º¯À§¸¦ 10ºÐ°£ ÃøÁ¤ÇÏ¿´´Ù. ÇÑ ¼öº¹Àç·á ´ç 15ȸ¸¦ ÃøÁ¤ÇÏ¿´À¸¸ç one way ANOVA¿Í »çÈÄ°ËÁ¤¹æ¹ýÀ¸·Î Tykey Test¸¦ ÀÌ¿ëÇÏ¿© $95\%$ ½Å·Ú¼öÁØ¿¡¼­ °¢ ¼öº¹Àç·áÀÇ ±³µÎº¯À§ ·®ÀÇ Â÷À̸¦ ºñ±³ÇÏ¿´´Ù. ÁßÇÕ¼öÃàÀÇ ¾ç°ú ±³µÎº¯À§ÀÇ ¾çÀÇ »ó°ü°ü°è¸¦ ȸ±ÍºÐ¼®¹ýÀ» ÀÌ¿ëÇÏ¿© ºÐ¼®ÇÏ¿´´Ù. ÁßÇÕ¼öÃàÀÇ ¾çÀº Heliomolar, Surefil < Heliomolar HB < Z100, Synergy Compact < Dyract AP, Pyramid, Compoglass F (p < 0.05), ±³µÎº¯À§ÀÇ ¾çÀº Heliomolar, Surefil, Z100, Heliomolar HB, Synergycompact < Compoglass F < Pyramid, Dyract AP (p < 0.05) ¿´´Ù. ÁßÇÕ¼öÃàÀÇ ¾ç°ú ±³µÎº¯À§´Â ³ôÀº »ó°ü°ü°è¸¦ ³ªÅ¸³»¾ú´Ù (p < 0.001).

The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the relationship between the amount of cuspal deflection and linear polymerization shrinkage in resin composite and polyacid modified resin composite, For cuspal defelction and shrinkage measurement, Dyract AP, Compoglass F, Z100, Surefil. Pyramid, Synergy Compact, Heliomolar and Heliomolar HB were used. For measuring polymerization shrinkage, a custom made linometer (R&B, Daejon, Korea) was used The amount of shrinkage among materials was compared using One-way ANOVA analysis and Tukey¡¯¡¯s test at the $95\%$ of confidence level For measuring cuspal deflection of teeth, standardized MOD cavities were prepared in extracted maxillary premolars. After a self-etching adhesive was applied, cavities were bulk filled with one of the felling materials. Fifteen teeth were used for each material. Cuspal deflection was measured by a custom made cuspal-deflection measuring device. One-way ANOVA analysis and Tukey¡¯¡¯s test were used to determine differences between the materials at the $95\%$ of confidence level, Correlation of polymerization shrinkage and cuspal deflection were analyzed by regression analysis. The amount of polymerization shrinkage from least to greatest was Heliomolar, Surefil < Heliomolar HB < Z100, Synergy Compact < Dyract AP < Pyramid, Compoglass F (p<0.05). The amount of cuspal deflection from least to greatest was Z100, Heliomolar, Heliomolar HB, Synergy Compact Surefil < Compoglass F < Pyramid, Dyract AP (p < 0.05). The amount of polymerization shrinkage and cuspal deflection showed a correlation (p<0.001).

Å°¿öµå

±³µÎº¯À§;ÁßÇÕ¼öÃà;º¹ÇÕ·¹Áø;Á¢ÂøÁ¦

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

 

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸

KCI