Format

Send to

Choose Destination
J Clin Diagn Res. 2016 Aug;10(8):ZC22-7. doi: 10.7860/JCDR/2016/18921.8234. Epub 2016 Aug 1.

Effect of Various Finishing Procedures on the Reflectivity (Shine) of Tooth Enamel - An In-vitro Study.

Author information

1
Postgraduate Student, Department of Orthodontics, ACPM Dental College , Dhule, Maharashtra, India .
2
Professor and Head, Department of Orthodontics, ACPM Dental College , Dhule, Maharashtra, India .
3
Professor, Department of Orthodontics, ACPM Dental College , Dhule, Maharashtra, India .
4
Senior Lecturer, Department of Orthodontics, Dr. Rajesh Ramdasji Kambe Dental College and Hospital , Akola, Maharashtra, India .
5
Senior Lecturer, Department of Orthodontics, Late Shri Yashwantrao Chavan Memorial Medical and Rural Development Foundations's Dental College and Hospital , Ahmednagar, Maharashtra, India .
6
Senior Lecturer, Department of Orthodontics, ACPM Dental College , Dhule, Maharashtra, India .

Abstract

INTRODUCTION:

Reflectivity of an object is a good parameter for surface finish. As the patient evaluates finishing as a function of gloss/reflectivity/shine an attempt is made here to evaluate changes in surface finish with custom made reflectometer.

AIM:

The aim of the present study was to study the effect of various procedures during orthodontic treatment on the shine of enamel, using a custom made reflectometer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

Sixty one extracted premolars were collected and each tooth was mounted on acrylic block. Reflectivity of the teeth was measured as compared to standard before any procedure. One tooth was kept as standard throughout the study. Sixty teeth were acid etched. Reflectivity was measured on custom made reflectometer and readings recorded. Same procedure was repeated after debonding. Then 60 samples were divided into three groups: Group 1 - Tungsten Carbide, Group 2 - Astropol, Group 3- Sof-Lex disc depending upon the finishing method after debonding and reflectivity was measured.

RESULTS:

The mean percentage of reflectivity after acid etching was 31.4%, debonding 45.5%, Tungsten carbide bur finishing (Group 1) was 58.3%, Astropol (Group 2) 72.8%, and Sof-Lex disc (Group 3) 84.4% as that to the standard. There was statistically very highly significant (p<0.001) difference in reflectivity restored by the three finishing materials in the study. Thus, the light reflection was better in Group 3> Group 2> Group 1.

CONCLUSION:

The primary goal was to restore the enamel to its original state after orthodontic treatment. The methods tested in this study could not restore the original enamel reflectivity.

KEYWORDS:

Custom made reflectometer; Gloss; Reflection

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center