Send to

Choose Destination
Oper Dent. 2003 Nov-Dec;28(6):740-6.

Effect of mouthrinses on microhardness and wear of composite and compomer restoratives.

Author information

Department of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, National University of Singapore, Republic of Singapore.


This study investigated the effect of commercially available mouthrinses on the microhardness and wear of composite (Esthet-X, Dentsply) and compomer (Dyract Posterior, Dentsply) restoratives. Fifty-four hardness and 36 wear specimens of each material were fabricated and stored in distilled water at 37 degrees C for two weeks. The specimens were then randomly divided into six equal groups and exposed to the following solutions for 24 hours at 37 degrees C: distilled water [WC] (control); Listerine Original [AP] (alcohol-containing essential oil/phenolic compound mouthrinse); Colgate Chloropharm [AC] (alcohol-containing chlorhexidine mouthrinse); Oral B Tooth & Gum Care [AF] (alcohol-containing fluoride mouthrinse); Oral B Tooth & Gum Care Alcohol Free [OF] (alcohol free fluoride mouthrinse) and Oral B Sensitive [PF] (phosphoric acid containing fluoride mouthrinse). After conditioning, the specimens were subjected to hardness testing using a digital microhardness tester (load = 500 gf; dwell time = 15 seconds) and wear testing with a reciprocal compression-sliding system (contact stress = 20 MPa). Wear depth was measured every 1,000 cycles up to 10,000 cycles using profilometry. Data was analyzed using ANOVA/Scheffe's test at significance level 0.05. Dyract was significantly softened by AP, while Esthet-X was significantly softened by AC and AP. The wear resistance of Dyract was significantly reduced after exposure to PF, while the wear resistance of Esthet-X was significantly reduced by AC. The effect of mouthrinses on hardness and wear was material dependent.

[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Loading ...
Support Center