Shear-peel bond strength of orthodontic primers in wet conditions

K. S. Kula, T. D. Nash, J. H. Purk

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this in vitro study was to determine whether a hydrophilic primer (TransbondTM MIP, [MIP]) produces a significant difference in shear/peel bond strength compared with a traditional hydrophobic primer (TransbondTM XT, [XT]) in wet (W) or dry (D) conditions and if there is a difference in the site of bond failure. Design: A randomized blinded in vitro design. Setting and Sample Population: The University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Dentistry. Forty extracted human premolars were divided into four test groups (n = 10 each): MIP-dry conditions (MIPD), MIP-wet conditions (MIPW), XT-dry (XTD) and XT-wet (XTW). Experimental Variable: Orthodontic brackets were bonded to the teeth according to the manufacturer's directions except XTW and MIPW were exposed to moisture. Outcome Measure: Shear/peel test 24 h after bonding using an Instron at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min and the adhesive remnant index to determine the site of bond failure. Results - The bond strengths (X ± SD) in MPa were XTD = 8.3 ± 2.3; XTW = 0.8 ± 0.7; MIPD = 7.5 ± 1.8 and MIPW = 7.9 ± 1.7. The shear/peel bond strengths were significantly different: XTD = MIPD = MIPW > XTW (p ≤ 0.01; two-way ANOVA; Tukey HSD). The ARI scores were also significantly different: XTD = MIPD = MIPW > XTW (p ≤ 0.01; Chi-square). Conclusions: Orthodontists who suspect moisture contamination should use a hydrophilic primer during bonding procedures to maintain shear/peel bond strength.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)96-100
Number of pages5
JournalOrthodontics and Craniofacial Research
Volume6
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - 2003
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Orthodontics
Orthodontic Brackets
School Dentistry
Bicuspid
Adhesives
Analysis of Variance
Tooth
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Population
In Vitro Techniques
Orthodontists
Direction compound

Keywords

  • Adhesives
  • Bond strength
  • Composite
  • Moisture insensitive primer
  • Orthodontics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Orthodontics
  • Oral Surgery
  • Otorhinolaryngology
  • Surgery

Cite this

Shear-peel bond strength of orthodontic primers in wet conditions. / Kula, K. S.; Nash, T. D.; Purk, J. H.

In: Orthodontics and Craniofacial Research, Vol. 6, No. 2, 2003, p. 96-100.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Kula, K. S. ; Nash, T. D. ; Purk, J. H. / Shear-peel bond strength of orthodontic primers in wet conditions. In: Orthodontics and Craniofacial Research. 2003 ; Vol. 6, No. 2. pp. 96-100.
@article{b902163e5ee24f9599cf9c23ecb34d2a,
title = "Shear-peel bond strength of orthodontic primers in wet conditions",
abstract = "Objective: The purpose of this in vitro study was to determine whether a hydrophilic primer (TransbondTM MIP, [MIP]) produces a significant difference in shear/peel bond strength compared with a traditional hydrophobic primer (TransbondTM XT, [XT]) in wet (W) or dry (D) conditions and if there is a difference in the site of bond failure. Design: A randomized blinded in vitro design. Setting and Sample Population: The University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Dentistry. Forty extracted human premolars were divided into four test groups (n = 10 each): MIP-dry conditions (MIPD), MIP-wet conditions (MIPW), XT-dry (XTD) and XT-wet (XTW). Experimental Variable: Orthodontic brackets were bonded to the teeth according to the manufacturer's directions except XTW and MIPW were exposed to moisture. Outcome Measure: Shear/peel test 24 h after bonding using an Instron at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min and the adhesive remnant index to determine the site of bond failure. Results - The bond strengths (X ± SD) in MPa were XTD = 8.3 ± 2.3; XTW = 0.8 ± 0.7; MIPD = 7.5 ± 1.8 and MIPW = 7.9 ± 1.7. The shear/peel bond strengths were significantly different: XTD = MIPD = MIPW > XTW (p ≤ 0.01; two-way ANOVA; Tukey HSD). The ARI scores were also significantly different: XTD = MIPD = MIPW > XTW (p ≤ 0.01; Chi-square). Conclusions: Orthodontists who suspect moisture contamination should use a hydrophilic primer during bonding procedures to maintain shear/peel bond strength.",
keywords = "Adhesives, Bond strength, Composite, Moisture insensitive primer, Orthodontics",
author = "Kula, {K. S.} and Nash, {T. D.} and Purk, {J. H.}",
year = "2003",
doi = "10.1034/j.1600-0854.2003.c242.x",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "6",
pages = "96--100",
journal = "Orthodontics and Craniofacial Research",
issn = "1601-6335",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Shear-peel bond strength of orthodontic primers in wet conditions

AU - Kula, K. S.

AU - Nash, T. D.

AU - Purk, J. H.

PY - 2003

Y1 - 2003

N2 - Objective: The purpose of this in vitro study was to determine whether a hydrophilic primer (TransbondTM MIP, [MIP]) produces a significant difference in shear/peel bond strength compared with a traditional hydrophobic primer (TransbondTM XT, [XT]) in wet (W) or dry (D) conditions and if there is a difference in the site of bond failure. Design: A randomized blinded in vitro design. Setting and Sample Population: The University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Dentistry. Forty extracted human premolars were divided into four test groups (n = 10 each): MIP-dry conditions (MIPD), MIP-wet conditions (MIPW), XT-dry (XTD) and XT-wet (XTW). Experimental Variable: Orthodontic brackets were bonded to the teeth according to the manufacturer's directions except XTW and MIPW were exposed to moisture. Outcome Measure: Shear/peel test 24 h after bonding using an Instron at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min and the adhesive remnant index to determine the site of bond failure. Results - The bond strengths (X ± SD) in MPa were XTD = 8.3 ± 2.3; XTW = 0.8 ± 0.7; MIPD = 7.5 ± 1.8 and MIPW = 7.9 ± 1.7. The shear/peel bond strengths were significantly different: XTD = MIPD = MIPW > XTW (p ≤ 0.01; two-way ANOVA; Tukey HSD). The ARI scores were also significantly different: XTD = MIPD = MIPW > XTW (p ≤ 0.01; Chi-square). Conclusions: Orthodontists who suspect moisture contamination should use a hydrophilic primer during bonding procedures to maintain shear/peel bond strength.

AB - Objective: The purpose of this in vitro study was to determine whether a hydrophilic primer (TransbondTM MIP, [MIP]) produces a significant difference in shear/peel bond strength compared with a traditional hydrophobic primer (TransbondTM XT, [XT]) in wet (W) or dry (D) conditions and if there is a difference in the site of bond failure. Design: A randomized blinded in vitro design. Setting and Sample Population: The University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Dentistry. Forty extracted human premolars were divided into four test groups (n = 10 each): MIP-dry conditions (MIPD), MIP-wet conditions (MIPW), XT-dry (XTD) and XT-wet (XTW). Experimental Variable: Orthodontic brackets were bonded to the teeth according to the manufacturer's directions except XTW and MIPW were exposed to moisture. Outcome Measure: Shear/peel test 24 h after bonding using an Instron at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min and the adhesive remnant index to determine the site of bond failure. Results - The bond strengths (X ± SD) in MPa were XTD = 8.3 ± 2.3; XTW = 0.8 ± 0.7; MIPD = 7.5 ± 1.8 and MIPW = 7.9 ± 1.7. The shear/peel bond strengths were significantly different: XTD = MIPD = MIPW > XTW (p ≤ 0.01; two-way ANOVA; Tukey HSD). The ARI scores were also significantly different: XTD = MIPD = MIPW > XTW (p ≤ 0.01; Chi-square). Conclusions: Orthodontists who suspect moisture contamination should use a hydrophilic primer during bonding procedures to maintain shear/peel bond strength.

KW - Adhesives

KW - Bond strength

KW - Composite

KW - Moisture insensitive primer

KW - Orthodontics

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0141566448&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0141566448&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1034/j.1600-0854.2003.c242.x

DO - 10.1034/j.1600-0854.2003.c242.x

M3 - Article

VL - 6

SP - 96

EP - 100

JO - Orthodontics and Craniofacial Research

JF - Orthodontics and Craniofacial Research

SN - 1601-6335

IS - 2

ER -