search for




 

A Study on the Fracture Strength of the Cement Gap
Int J Clin Prev Dent 2021;17(3):180-180
Published online September 30, 2021;  https://doi.org/10.15236/ijcpd.2021.17.3.180
© 2021 International Journal of Clinical Preventive Dentistry.

Woon Seon Kwak, Chung Jae Lee

Department of Oral Health Graduate School of Public Health, Dankook University, Shin Han University, Republic of korea
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Abstract
This research is conducted for better clinical test of ZIRCONIA as we find out the fracture strength difference of Zirconia on cement gaps of FULL CROWN that made use of Zirconia which is somewhat being used in recent dental technology. We produced each nine of Zirconia Crown of Zirconia fracture cement gaps (0.03)A group, (0.05)B group, (0.08)C group on cement gaps by use of CAD/CAM, and compared the results. We could end up getting conclusions as following: There was fracture strength difference per cement gaps but no impact (p<0.05). There was difference between 1.962±0.259 from group A and 2.005±0.367 from group B, but no impact (p<0.05). There was difference between 1.962±0.259from group A and 2.478±0.331 from group C, but it’s hard to consider as an impact (p<0.05). Because of the higt pressure 0.08mm is fracture as well as Margin has a lot of empty space due to Gap for 0.08mm. To identify the difference between 0.08mm and 0.05mm, 0.08mm is selected as a Gap. Therefore when it come to use 0.05mm authentically 0.05 is quite practical to use as a Gap
Methods: We produced each nine of Zirconia Crown of Zirconia fracture cement gaps A group (0.03 mm), Bgroup (0.05 mm), C group (0.08 mm) on cement gaps by use of CAD/CAM, and compared the results. We couldend up getting conclusions as following.


Results: There was fracture strength difference per cement gaps but no impact (p<0.05). There was difference between 1.962 0.259 from group A and 2.005 0.367 from group B, but no impact (p<0.05). There was difference between 1.962 0.259 from group A and 2.478 0.331 from group C, but it s hard to be considered as an impact (p<0.05).
Conclusion: Because of the hight pressure 0.08 mm is fractured and Margin has a lot of empty space due to gap for 0.08 mm. To identify the difference between 0.08 mm and 0.05 mm, 0.08 mm is selected as a gap. Therefore when it comes to using 0.05 mm authentically 0.05 mm is quite practical to use as a gap.


September 2021, 17 (3)