Profilometer, SEM, and visual assessment of porcelain polishing methods

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Research has indicated that polishing ground porcelain is essential to control the wear of opposing occlusal surfaces and reduce the inflammation of contacted soft tissue. Five popular methods for polishing porcelain were evaluated by use of a profilometer, SEM, and normal vision. Seventy disks, 35 Biobond disks and 35 Ceramco disks, were roughened with a green stone and polished with one of the methods according to the manufacturers' directions. Brasseler, Dedeco, Dentsply, and Shofu porcelain polishing systems were suitable for restoring ground porcelain. However, clinical evaluations correlated to the profilometer and SEM readings revealed that the Brasseler system was superior for polishing Ceramco porcelain whereas the Den-Mat system was unacceptable.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)627-634
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Prosthetic Dentistry
Volume65
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - 1991

Fingerprint

Dental Porcelain
Tooth Attrition
Reading
Inflammation
Research

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Oral Surgery
  • Dentistry(all)

Cite this

Profilometer, SEM, and visual assessment of porcelain polishing methods. / Goldstein, Gary; Barnhard, Bruce R.; Penugonda, Bapanaiah.

In: Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, Vol. 65, No. 5, 1991, p. 627-634.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{4bb6d2a7aa5c49e88cf90c3b94066da3,
title = "Profilometer, SEM, and visual assessment of porcelain polishing methods",
abstract = "Research has indicated that polishing ground porcelain is essential to control the wear of opposing occlusal surfaces and reduce the inflammation of contacted soft tissue. Five popular methods for polishing porcelain were evaluated by use of a profilometer, SEM, and normal vision. Seventy disks, 35 Biobond disks and 35 Ceramco disks, were roughened with a green stone and polished with one of the methods according to the manufacturers' directions. Brasseler, Dedeco, Dentsply, and Shofu porcelain polishing systems were suitable for restoring ground porcelain. However, clinical evaluations correlated to the profilometer and SEM readings revealed that the Brasseler system was superior for polishing Ceramco porcelain whereas the Den-Mat system was unacceptable.",
author = "Gary Goldstein and Barnhard, {Bruce R.} and Bapanaiah Penugonda",
year = "1991",
doi = "10.1016/0022-3913(91)90196-4",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "65",
pages = "627--634",
journal = "Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry",
issn = "0022-3913",
publisher = "Mosby Inc.",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Profilometer, SEM, and visual assessment of porcelain polishing methods

AU - Goldstein, Gary

AU - Barnhard, Bruce R.

AU - Penugonda, Bapanaiah

PY - 1991

Y1 - 1991

N2 - Research has indicated that polishing ground porcelain is essential to control the wear of opposing occlusal surfaces and reduce the inflammation of contacted soft tissue. Five popular methods for polishing porcelain were evaluated by use of a profilometer, SEM, and normal vision. Seventy disks, 35 Biobond disks and 35 Ceramco disks, were roughened with a green stone and polished with one of the methods according to the manufacturers' directions. Brasseler, Dedeco, Dentsply, and Shofu porcelain polishing systems were suitable for restoring ground porcelain. However, clinical evaluations correlated to the profilometer and SEM readings revealed that the Brasseler system was superior for polishing Ceramco porcelain whereas the Den-Mat system was unacceptable.

AB - Research has indicated that polishing ground porcelain is essential to control the wear of opposing occlusal surfaces and reduce the inflammation of contacted soft tissue. Five popular methods for polishing porcelain were evaluated by use of a profilometer, SEM, and normal vision. Seventy disks, 35 Biobond disks and 35 Ceramco disks, were roughened with a green stone and polished with one of the methods according to the manufacturers' directions. Brasseler, Dedeco, Dentsply, and Shofu porcelain polishing systems were suitable for restoring ground porcelain. However, clinical evaluations correlated to the profilometer and SEM readings revealed that the Brasseler system was superior for polishing Ceramco porcelain whereas the Den-Mat system was unacceptable.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0026163348&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0026163348&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/0022-3913(91)90196-4

DO - 10.1016/0022-3913(91)90196-4

M3 - Article

VL - 65

SP - 627

EP - 634

JO - Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry

JF - Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry

SN - 0022-3913

IS - 5

ER -