Advertisement

Review: Finishing and polishing procedures of (resin-modified) glass ionomers and compomers in paediatric dentistry

  • N. S. Koupis
  • L. A. M. MarksEmail author
  • R. M. H. Verbeeck
  • L. C. Martens
Review

Abstract

Background: A smooth surface has a beneficial effect on the aesthetic quality and longevity of a dental restoration, as well as on its biocompatibility with the oral tissues. In this review studies on glass-ionomer cements (GIC), resin-modified glass-ionomer cements (RM-GIC) and compomers or polyacid-modified resin composites (PAM-C) were assessed as these are currently used in paediatric dentistry. Method: Medline database (U.S.A. National Library of Medicine) was searched using WinSpirs and PubMed. This search used a keyword filter including dental materials, polishing procedures, and instrumentation including influencing factors. Findings: Although the literature shows different commercially available tools it seems that the ideal polishing instrumentation in paediatric dentistry for GIC and compomers is not yet on the market. Furthermore, the constant development of dental materials and polishing products impose a need for continuing scientific research.

Key words

compomers glass ionomer cements finishing dental 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Berastegui E, Canalda C, Brau E, Miquel C. Surface roughness of finished composite resins. J Prosthet Dent 1992;68:742–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bouvier D, Duprez JP, Lissac M. Comparative evaluation of polishing systems on the surface of three esthetic materials. J Oral Rehabil 1997;24:888–94.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Briseño B, Ernst CR, Willershausen-Zönnchen B. Rise in pulp temperature during finishing and polishing of resin composite restorations: An in vitro study. Quintessence Int 1995;26:361-5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Chung KH. Effects of finishing and polishing procedures on the surface texture of resin composites. Dent Mater 1994;10:325–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dodge WW, Dal RA, Cooley RL, Duke ES. Comparison of wet and dry finishing of resin composites with aluminum oxide discs. Dent Mater 1991;7:18–20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Eide R, Tveit AB. Finishing and polishing glass-ionomer cements. Acta Odontol Scand 1990;48:409–13.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Firla MT. Simplified trimming and finishing of glass-polyalkenoate (ionomer) cement restorations. Quintessence Int 1991;22:207–10.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Fruits TJ, Miranda FJ, Coury TL. Effects of equivalent abrasive grit sizes utilizing differing polishing motions on selected restorative materials. Quintessence Int 1996;27:279–85.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Geiger S, Ravchanukayev M, Liberman R. Surface roughness evaluation of resin modified glass-ionomers polished utilizing poly(acrylic acid) gel. J Oral Rehabil 1999;26:704–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Heath JR, Jordan JH, Watts DC. The effect of time of trimming on the surface finish of anterior composite resins. J Oral Rehabil 1993;20:45–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Herrgott AML, Ziemiecki TL. An evaluation of different composite resin systems finished with various abrasives. Amer. Dent. Assoc.1989;729-32.Google Scholar
  12. Hoelscher DC, Neme AM, Pink FE, Hughes PJ. The effect of three finishing systems on four esthetic restorative materials. Oper Dent 1998;23:36–42.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Hondrum SO, Fernandez R Jr. Contouring, finishing, and polishing class 5 restorative materials. Oper Dent 1997;22:30–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Hotta M, Hirukawa H, Aono M. The effect of glaze on restorative glassionomer cements. J Oral Rehabil 1995;22:197–201.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jefferies SR. The art and science of abrasive finishing and polishing in restorative dentistry. Dent Clin North Am 1998;42:613–27.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Kaplan BA, Goldstein GR, Vijayaraghavan TV, Nelson IK. The effect of three polishing systems on the surface roughness of four hybrid composites: a profilometric and scanning electron microscopy study. J Prosthet Dent 1996;76:34–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Liberman R, Geiger S. Surface texture evaluation of glass ionomer restorative materialspolished utilizing poly(acrylic acid) gel. J Oral Rehabil 1994;21:87–94.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lim CC, Neo J, Yap A. The influence of finishing time on the marginal seal of a resin-modified glass-ionomer and polyacid-modified composite. J Oral Rehabil 1999;26:48–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Liston PN, Kumara R, Tong DC. Displaced polishing discs: two case reports. Br Dent J 2001;191:74–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Naguib EA, Carlson TJ. The effect of finishing techniques on marginal adaptation and surface morphology of three glass ionomer cements. J Indiana Dent Assoc 1992;71:20–2.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Neme AL, Frazier KB, Roeder LB, Debner TL. Effect of prophylactic polishing protocols on the surface roughness of esthetic restorative materials. Oper Dent 2002;27:50–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Paulillo LA, Coradazzi JL, Lovadino JR, Serra MC. Surface finishing of glass ionomer. Am J Dent 1997;10:137–40.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Pearson GJ. Finishing of glass-ionomer cements. Dent Update 1991;18:424–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Pratten DH, Johnson GH. An evaluation of finishing instruments for an anterior and a posterior composite. J Prosthet Dent 1988;60:154–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Quirynen M, Bollen CML. The influence of surface roughness and surface-free energy on supra- and subgingival plaque formation in man. A review of the literature. J Clin Periodontol 1995;22:1–14.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Randall RC, Wilson NHF. Clinical testing of restorative materials: some historical landmarks. J Dent 1999;27:543–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Reis AF, Giannini M, Lovadino JR, Ambrosano GM. Effects of various finishing systems on the surface roughness and staining susceptibility of packable composite resins. Dent Mater 2003;19:12–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Roeder LB, Tata WH, Powers JM. Effect of finishing and polishing procedures on the surface roughness of packable composites. Oper Dent 2000;25:534–43.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. St. Germain HAJr, Meiers JC. Surface roughness of light-activated glassionomer cement restorative materials after finishing. Oper Dent 1996;21:103–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Stoddard JW, Johnson GH. An evaluation of polishing agents for composite resins. J Prosthet Dent 1991:65:491–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Tate WH, Powers JM. Surface roughness of composites and hybrid ionomers. Oper Dent 1996:21:53–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Wilder ADJr, Swift EJ Jr, May KN Jr, Thompson JY, McDougal RA. Effect of finishing technique on the microleakage and surface texture of resin-modified glass ionomer restorative materials. J Dent 2000:28:367–73PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Yap AUJ, Lye KW, Sau CW. Surface characteristics of tooth-colored restoratives polished utilizing different polishing systems. Oper Dent 1997:22:260–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Yap AUJ, Mok BYY. Surface finish of a new hybrid aesthetic restorative material. Oper Dent 2002:27:161–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Yap AUJ, Ong SB, Yap WY, Tan WS, Yeo JC. Surface texture of resin-modifiedglass ionomer cements: effects of finishing/polishing time. Oper Dent 2002a:27:462–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Yap AUJ, Sau CW, Lye KW. Effects of finishing/polishing time on surface characteristics of tooth-colourd restoratives. J Oral Rehabil 1998:25:456–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Yap AUJ, Tan WS, Yeo JC, Yap WY, Ong SB. Surface texture of resin-modified glass ionomer cements: effects of finishing/polishing systems. Oper Dent 2002b:27:381–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Archives of Paediatric Dentistry 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • N. S. Koupis
    • 1
  • L. A. M. Marks
    • 1
    Email author
  • R. M. H. Verbeeck
    • 2
  • L. C. Martens
    • 1
  1. 1.Dept. Paediatric Dentistry and Special CarePaeCaMeD researchGentBelgium
  2. 2.Dept. Dental Biomaterials Science, IBITECHGhent UniversityGentBelgium

Personalised recommendations