Comparison of Wear‐Resistance of Class V Restorative Materials

Compomers and resin-modified glass ionomers have been developed to improve the physical properties of traditional glass ionomer cements. This project compared the toothbrush wear-resistance of three compomers (Compoglass, Dyract, Hytac) and three resin-modified glass ionomer restorative materials (Fuji II LC, Photac-Fil, Vitremer) to that of two resin-based composites (Herculite XRV, Silux Plus). Specimens (n = 7) were prepared according to manufacturers' instructions and stored in a humidor for 48 hours prior to testing. The specimens were subjected to 120,000 strokes at 1.5 Hz, using a brush-head force of 200 g on a Manly V-8 cross-brushing machine. The slurry contained a 50:50 (w/w) mixture of toothpaste and deionized water. Abrasion-resistance was calculated by measuring specimen mass-loss prior to and subsequent to brushing. The data were analyzed using a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the Tukey-Kramer post-hoc test. Significant differences (p < .0001) in mass-loss were found, and loss ranged from 0.013 +/- 0.003 g (Hytac) to 0.061 +/- 0.009 g (Compoglass). No correlation (p = .959) between wear-resistance and experimentally determined filler content existed. This study showed that all but one hybrid resin-ionomer type material exhibited a resistance to toothbrush wear that was as good as or better than that of the two traditional resin-based composite materials.