This study evaluated the microhardness of restorative materials after the use of self-etching and acid-etching adhesives. Specimens were divided into four groups: Group 1 (CR): Composite resin, Group 2 (GIC): Glass ionomer cement chemically activated, Group 3 (EC): Dual resinous cement, Group 4 (E): Dual resinous cement. Each group was divided into three subgroups, according to the type of adhesive system applied on the surface: Subgroup 1 (C): Control subgroup, Subgroup 2 (XE): Xeno III self-etching adhesive, Subgroup 3 (SB): Single bond acid-etching adhesive. Vickers microhardness analysis was performed on the surfaces and the data were submitted to the two-way ANOVA and the Tukey's test. The means for the material factor: GIC: (35.61)a; CR: (43.54)b; E: (44.65)b; EC: (50.13)c. The means for the adhesive factor: SB: (36.35)a; XE: (38.44)a; C: (55.65)b. All materials tested showed a decrease in surface hardness after application of the adhesive systems, irrespective of the system. The lowest microhardness was shown by GIC and the highest by Enforce Core.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Barcellos et al. (2011) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: