We have located links that may give you full text access.
Impact of different brushing/abrasion protocols on erosive tooth wear for in vitro studies.
Archives of Oral Biology 2023 April
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the influence of different toothbrushing (with dentifrice) protocols on the progression of erosive tooth wear for in vitro studies.
DESIGN: Bovine enamel specimens were randomly distributed into 12 experimental groups (n = 10), according to the study factors: (1) brushing movement (horizontal or circular); (2) slurry diluent (artificial saliva or distilled water); (3) toothpaste dilution ratio (1:2, 1:3 or 1:4). A 5-day erosion-abrasion cycling model was performed, each consisting of 4 erosive challenges (0.3 % citric acid, pH=2.6) followed by 60 min exposure to artificial saliva. Brushing with fluoride toothpaste (15 s, 1400 ppm F- , AmF) was carried out 2x/day. Enamel surface loss (SL) was determined by optical profilometry. Data were statistically analyzed with three-way ANOVA and Tukey tests (α = 0.05).
RESULTS: SL was lower for the horizontal movement than for the circular (p = 0.044). There were no significant differences among the dilution ratios for artificial saliva. For distilled water, the more concentrated slurry (1:2) presented greater surface loss than the less concentrated slurries (1:3 and 1:4, p = 0.049 and p = 0.014, respectively). Dilutions with artificial saliva at ratios 1:3 and 1:4 presented higher surface loss than with distilled water (p = 0.008 and p < 0.001, respectively); however, for 1:2 ratio, there were no significant differences between the diluents.
CONCLUSIONS: The in vitro progression of enamel SL was influenced by the brushing movement, as well as the combination of the dilution ratio and the diluent of the toothpaste slurry, and therefore, all these factors must be considered when comparing results from different studies.
DESIGN: Bovine enamel specimens were randomly distributed into 12 experimental groups (n = 10), according to the study factors: (1) brushing movement (horizontal or circular); (2) slurry diluent (artificial saliva or distilled water); (3) toothpaste dilution ratio (1:2, 1:3 or 1:4). A 5-day erosion-abrasion cycling model was performed, each consisting of 4 erosive challenges (0.3 % citric acid, pH=2.6) followed by 60 min exposure to artificial saliva. Brushing with fluoride toothpaste (15 s, 1400 ppm F- , AmF) was carried out 2x/day. Enamel surface loss (SL) was determined by optical profilometry. Data were statistically analyzed with three-way ANOVA and Tukey tests (α = 0.05).
RESULTS: SL was lower for the horizontal movement than for the circular (p = 0.044). There were no significant differences among the dilution ratios for artificial saliva. For distilled water, the more concentrated slurry (1:2) presented greater surface loss than the less concentrated slurries (1:3 and 1:4, p = 0.049 and p = 0.014, respectively). Dilutions with artificial saliva at ratios 1:3 and 1:4 presented higher surface loss than with distilled water (p = 0.008 and p < 0.001, respectively); however, for 1:2 ratio, there were no significant differences between the diluents.
CONCLUSIONS: The in vitro progression of enamel SL was influenced by the brushing movement, as well as the combination of the dilution ratio and the diluent of the toothpaste slurry, and therefore, all these factors must be considered when comparing results from different studies.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app