Evaluation of Radiant Power of the Light Curing Units Used in Clinics at Governmental and Privates Dental Faculties.

Background:  To evaluate the radiant power of the light cure units (LCUs) in relation to their type, radiant exitance, number of years in clinical use, and condition of LCUs tips in governmental and public clinics in Dental Faculties in Sana'a City.
Materials and Methods: LCUs were collected from different colleges at Sanaa City, Yemen, then LCU data as type, clinical age (<1 year, between 1-5 and ˃ 5-years), tip condition was visually inspected for damage and adhering debris, and the radiant exitance values of the tested LCUs. Radiant exitance values were subcategorized into three groups: <400, 400-850, and >850 mW/cm², labeled as inadequate, marginal, and adequate radiant exitances, respectively. A Woodpecker radiometer was used with a mode lasting of 20 seconds was used with each LCU. Descriptive statistics of the different parameters were evaluated with SPSS version 25. One-way ANOVA and Mann-Whitney tests were performed to determine the mean difference between the groups with a significance value of ˂ 0.05 was considered.
Results: Two hundred twenty-three LCUs were surveyed, and the majority were Light-emitting diode (LED). Forty-nine (21.9%), 117 (52.4%), 57 (25.6%) recorded lesser than, 400-850, and more than 850 mW/cm², respectively. Radiant exitances of < year-old units were found to be higher than those of units used for ˃ 5 years with significant differences (p=0.001). The ANOVA test showed significant differences between the radiant exitance with clinical age and LCU tip conditions and a strong correlation p ˃ 0.050.
Conclusion: LED curing lights were the most used in the tested Dental Faculties. More than half of the used LCU offered sufficient radiant exitance. Clinical age, the presence or absence of composite buildups, and damage to curing tips showed significantly affect radiant exitance values.
Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest related to the study, including financial, personal, or other relationships that may influence the study or its interpretation.
(© 2024 Hasan et al.)