Examinando por Materia "Fracture resistance"

Mostrando 1 - 3 de 3

Acceso abierto
Comparative in vitro study of the resistance to fracture in two types of bis-acrylic resin, Lima – Peru 2021
(Universidad Privada Norbert Wiener, 2021-10-21) Perez Acosta, Josefina; Rojas Ortega, Raúl Antonio
The present study, titled "In vitro comparative study of fracture resistance in two types of bis-acrylic resins, Lima – Peru 2021," aimed to compare the fracture resistance of two types of bis-acrylic resins, Acrytemp® and Protemp 4™. A hypothetical-deductive method was used, with a quantitative, applied, cross-sectional, prospective, experimental approach, and a post-test experimental design. A sample of 36 bis-acrylic resin cylinders (Acrytemp® and Protemp 4™) was studied, divided into two groups of 18. These analysis units had dimensions of 4 mm in diameter by 8 mm in height and were subjected to compression using the CMT-5L LG universal testing machine. Results: The fracture resistance of Acrytemp® resin showed a mean of 150.9544 MPa, while Protemp 4™ resin showed a mean of 272.5817 MPa. Hypothesis testing using the Student's t-test yielded a p-value of 0.000, which is less than the significance level of p≤0.05, thus accepting the alternate hypothesis. Conclusion: There is a statistically significant difference in fracture resistance between the two types of bis-acrylic resins.
Acceso abierto
Fracture resistance of microhybrid resins compared to nanohybrid resins: in vitro study, Lima, Peru 2019
(Universidad Privada Norbert Wiener, 2019-11-09) Mamani Jáuregui, Marisol Fiorela; Girano Castaños, Jorge Alberto
Introduction: Nowadays, composite resin restorations are a daily part of dental care, requiring not only excellent aesthetic results but also high fracture resistance under occlusal loads. Objective: To compare the fracture resistance of microhybrid resins and nanohybrid resins. Methodology: Two types of composite resins were used, molded into cylindrical shapes with dimensions of 10 mm in height and 4 mm in diameter. These cylinders were constructed in 2 mm increments, with each increment photo-cured for 20 seconds at 800 nw, and the final layer photo-cured for 40 seconds at 800 nw. The sample size was determined through statistical calculations, comprising 14 resin cylinders of each type. The cylinders were subjected to compression using a universal testing machine, which applied a compressive force at a rate of 0.75 mm/min ± 0.25 mm/min until the resin cylinders fractured. Data were processed using SPSS and analyzed with the Mann-Whitney U test. Results: The fracture resistance of the microhybrid resin was 262.69 ± 42.656 MPa, while that of the nanohybrid resin was 219.45 ± 27.887 MPa. Comparing the two materials revealed that the microhybrid resin had significantly higher fracture resistance than the nanohybrid resin, with a difference of 43.24 MPa (p<0.05). Conclusion: Microhybrid resins exhibit greater fracture resistance compared to nanohybrid resins.
Acceso abierto
Resistance to fracture of fluid and bulk-type resins in comparison to conventional resins. in vitro study. Lima Perú. 2020.
(Universidad Privada Norbert Wiener, 2020-12-29) Collao Huerta, Oscar Pablo Cesar; Adrianzen Acurio, César Augusto
Objective: To determine the fracture resistance of flowable and bulk-fill resins compared to conventional resins. Methodology: Three types of resins were used: a conventional resin, a flowable resin, and a bulk-fill resin, each shaped into cylinders with dimensions of 8 millimeters in height and 4 millimeters in diameter. The sample size was determined by sample calculation, using 10 resin cylinders of each type, which were subjected to compression by a universal testing machine. This machine applied a compressive force on the resin cylinders at a rate of 1 mm/min of compression until the cylinders fractured. Data processing was carried out using SPSS software with the ANOVA statistical test. Results: It was found that the fracture resistance of conventional resin was 149.879 ± 18.609 Megapascals, the fracture resistance of the flowable resin was 122.994 ± 26.906 Megapascals, and the fracture resistance of the bulk-fill resin was 122.994 ± 26.906 Megapascals. Conclusion: The flowable resin exhibited higher fracture resistance than the conventional resin, and the latter showed greater resistance than the bulk-fill resin.