STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Reduced softness and separation from the denture base are the most significant problems of long-term soft lining materials. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the durometer Shore A hardness and tensile bond strength of long-term soft denture lining materials and to investigate the correlation between these 2 properties. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A group of 7 soft lining materials, 6 silicone based (Dentusil, GC Reline Soft, GC Reline Ultrasoft, Mucopren Soft, Mucosoft, Sofreliner Tough) and 1 acrylic resin based (Durabase), were evaluated for durometer Shore A hardness and tensile bond strength to heat-polymerized denture base resin (Lucitone 199). A specially designed split mold and loading assembly with a swivel connector were used for the durometer Shore A hardness test and tensile bond strength test to improve accuracy and facilitate measurement. Three specimens of each product were stored in a 37 degrees C water bath, and durometer Shore A hardness tests were carried out after 24 hours and 28 days. A tensile bond strength test was carried out for 10 specimens of each product, which were stored in a 37 degrees C water bath for 24 hours before the test. Repeated-measures ANOVA, the Kruskal-Wallis and Duncan multiple range tests, and the Spearman correlation were used for statistical analyses. RESULTS: The repeated-measures ANOVA found significant durometer Shore A hardness differences for the materials (P<.001) and the interaction effect (agingxmaterials) (P<.001). GC Reline Ultrasoft showed the lowest mean durometer Shore A hardness (21.30 +/-0.29 for 24 hours, 34.73 +/-0.47 for 28 days), and GC Reline Soft showed the highest mean durometer Shore A hardness (50.13 +/-0.48 for 24 hours, 57.20 +/-0.28 for 28 days). The Kruskal-Wallis test found a significant difference in the mean tensile bond strength values (P<.001). GC Reline Ultrasoft (0.82 +/-0.32 MPa) and Mucopren Soft (0.96 +/-0.46 MPa) had a significantly lower mean tensile bond strength (P<.05). GC Reline Soft had the highest mean tensile bond strength (2.99 +/-0.43 MPa) (P<.05), and acrylic resin-based Durabase showed a significantly different tensile bond strength (1.32 +/-0.16 MPa), except for Mucopren Soft, among the materials (P<.05). The tensile bond strength and Shore A hardness showed a statistically insignificant moderate positive correlation (r=0.571, P=.180 for Shore A hardness 24 hours versus tensile bond strength; r=0.607, P=.148 for Shore A hardness 28 days versus tensile bond strength). CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of this study, significant differences were found in durometer Shore A hardness (with aging time) and tensile bond strength among the materials. Adhesive failure was moderately correlated with durometer Shore A hardness, especially after 28 days, but was not significant.
No clinical trial protocols linked to this paper
Clinical trials are automatically linked when NCT numbers are found in the paper's title or abstract.PICO Elements
No PICO elements extracted yet. Click "Extract PICO" to analyze this paper.
Paper Details
MeSH Terms
Associated Data
No associated datasets or code repositories found for this paper.
Related Papers
Related paper suggestions will be available in future updates.