Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

Ä¡°ú¿ë ¾ÆÅ©¸± ÀÇÄ¡»ó ·¹ÁøÀÇ ¿¬¸¶ ¹æ¹ý¿¡ µû¸¥ Ç¥¸éÁ¶µµ¿Í ±¤Åõµ

Influence of polishing methods on surface roughness and gloss of acrylic denture base resins

´ëÇÑÄ¡°úÀç·áÇÐȸÁö 2014³â 41±Ç 4È£ p.305 ~ 310
Ȳ¼º½Ä, ÀÓ¿ë¿î, ±è½Ãö, Àü¼ö°æ, ÀÌÇØÇü,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
Ȳ¼º½Ä ( Hwang Seong-Sig ) - °æµ¿´ëÇб³ Ä¡±â°øÇаú
ÀÓ¿ë¿î ( Im Youn-Woon ) - ´Ü±¹´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ »ýüÀç·áÇб³½Ç
±è½Ãö ( Kim Si-Chul ) - ´Ü±¹´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ »ýüÀç·áÇб³½Ç
Àü¼ö°æ ( Jun Soo-Kyung ) - ´Ü±¹´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ »ýüÀç·áÇб³½Ç
ÀÌÇØÇü ( Lee Hae-Hyoung ) - ´Ü±¹´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ »ýüÀç·áÇб³½Ç

Abstract


This study investigated the influence of polishing methods on the surface roughness and gloss of three acrylic denture base resins. Two polishing methods were applied to the resin specimens: high polishing by laboratory lathe with pumice and rouge (HP) and chairside polishing kit with three silicone points (SP). Specimen preparation and surface polishing procedures were conducted to manufacturer¡¯s recommendation. Surface roughness and gloss were measured by a contact type tester and a LED gloss checker with dual measurement mode (20¡Æ, 60¡Æ), respectively. Data were analyzed by one-way ANOVA and Scheffe¡¯s post hoc test. P<0.05 was considered as significant. Within the limitation of this study, following conclusions were drawn. For all acrylic resins, HP method produced a significantly lower surface roughness (Ra, Ry, Rz) than did SP method (P<0.05). SP procedure of specimens marked a higher surface roughness (Ra) over the threshold roughness minimizing plaque attachment, 0.2 ¥ìm. Surface gloss units of specimens at 60¡Æ were higher than 20¡Æ illumination, but 20¡Æ gloss produced materials difference than 60¡Æ gloss. A strong negative correlation between all gloss units (8¡Æ/20¡Æ/60¡Æ) and Ra, 60¡Æ gloss showed the highest correlation coefficient.

Å°¿öµå

Surface roughness; Gloss; Acrylic resin; Polishing method; Correlation

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

 

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸

KCI