Abstract
This study verified the influence of curing methods and light sources on contraction stress, stress rate and degree of conversion (DC) of a restorative composite at two C-factor (CF) levels. For the stress test, composite (0.84 mm thick) was applied between two glass rods 5-mm in diameter mounted in a servohydraulic testing machine. Stress rates were calculated as the change in stress vs time at each second. DC was measured by micro-FTIR. Five curing methods were tested at two C-factor levels (1.5 and 3.0): High Intensity LED (LED HI), Continuous Light (QTH CL), Medium Intensity LED (LED MI), Low Intensity LED (LED LI) and Pulse Delay (QTH PD). The results were analyzed by ANOVA and Tukey's test (alpha = 0.05). For the stress test at CF 1.5, QTH PD presented lower values than LED HI, QTH CL and LED LI. At CF 3.0, no difference was observed among the curing methods. For all curing methods, stress values at CF 3.0 were statistically higher than those at CF 1.5. LED HI presented the highest maximum stress rate, followed by QTH CL, LED MI, LED LI and QTH PD for both C-factors. In the DC test, no difference was observed among the methods and between the C-factor levels.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
