Search

The geometrical properties of toothbrushes play a role in developing abrasive tooth wear and non-carious cervical lesions. This study investigated the interplay between the toothbrush tuft arrangement (crossed vs. parallel) and bristle stiffness (soft vs. medium) on the abrasive dentin wear using three slurries with different levels of abrasivity (RDA: 67, 121 and 174). Twelve groups of bovine dentin samples (n = 20) were brushed with a combination of the aforementioned variables. Abrasive dentin wear was recorded with a profilometer and the resulting abrasive wear of each group was calculated and compared with each other using two-way ANOVA and pairwise tests. Toothbrushes with parallel tuft arrangement caused statistically significantly higher dentin wear compared to crossed tuft arrangement, regardless of the abrasivity level of the used slurry and the bristle stiffness. Soft crossed tuft toothbrushes caused statistically significantly higher abrasive dentin wear than medium crossed tuft toothbrushes, while soft and medium parallel tuft toothbrushes caused the same amounts of dentin wear, regardless of the RDA value of the used slurry. These results could be helpful for dentists and dental hygienists when advising patients. Crossed tuft toothbrushes could be a less-abrasive choice in comparison to parallel tuft toothbrushes.

This study investigated the impact of a separate silanization step on the repair bond strength of composite substrates using a universal adhesive after various mechanical surface treatments. Composite specimens were aged and exposed to the following mechanical roughening treatments: diamond bur abrasion, aluminum oxide sandblasting, or silica coating. The specimens were then either left untreated or conditioned with universal adhesive (Scotchbond Universal), or a silane coupling agent was applied before the use of the universal adhesive or a conventional adhesive (Optibond FL). The conditioned surfaces and fresh substrate (positive control group) were covered with repair composite, and microtensile bond strength testing was performed. The significantly highest bond strength was obtained in the positive control group. Repair bond strength of the universal adhesive applied after a separate silanization step was similar to that without prior silanization, independent of the mechanical surface treatment. Moreover, after silica coating, no significant differences in the repair bond strength were detected among the different adhesive treatments. In conclusion, a separate silanization step before surface conditioning with the universal adhesive does not enhance the repair bond strength. On silica-coated composite substrates, repair bond strength values of the universal adhesive were similar to those of the conventional adhesive.