摘要
目的:比较POSS复合树脂和三种临床常用复合树脂/聚合体弯曲强度和抗压强度,为POSS复合树脂的临床应用提供参考依据。方法:采用Zwick电子万能试验机分别测试试样的弯曲强度和抗压强度,以l.0mm/min的加载速度垂直加压直至试样破坏,记录破坏时的载荷,测试结果用SPSS16.0软件进行多样本均数方差分析(F检验)和SNK-q检验。结果:弯曲强度测试结果:FiltekTM Z250组最高,与其他三组间均有统计学差异;BeautifilII组好于POSS组和SureFil组(P<0.05);POSS组与SureFil组间无显著性差异(P>0.05)。抗压强度测试结果:FiltekTM Z250组最高,与其他三组间均有统计学差异;SureFil组好于POSS组和BeautifilII组(P<0.05);POSS组和BeautifilII组间无显著性差异(P>0.05)。结论:POSS复合树脂的弯曲强度和抗压强度可以满足临床应用需要。
Objective：To compare POSS composite resin and three other composite resins on flexural strength and compressive strength.Method：Flexural strength and compressive strength of each material were determined by Zwick/z100 universal testing machine,which were pressed by 1 mm/min until fracture occurred.Each fracture load was recorded automatally,and the data were analyzed by ANOVA and SNK-q.Result：The test of flexural strength shows that FiltekTM Z250 composite resin exhibited higher flexural strength than the other three composite resins,and Beautifil II composite resin is in the second place.There was no significant statistical difference between POSS composite resin and SureFil composite resin;The data of compressive strength test revealed that the compressive strength of FiltekTM Z250 composite resin is the highest,and the second was SureFil composite resin.No significant statistical difference was observed between POSS composite resin and Beautifil II composite resin.Conclusion：The results suggest that the flexural strength and compressive strength of POSS composite resin meet the clinical requirements.
出处
《临床口腔医学杂志》
2010年第3期174-177,共4页
Journal of Clinical Stomatology
基金
国家自然科学基金资助项目(10472028)
教育部博士点基金项目(20070213054)
黑龙江省自然科学基金项目(D0329)
关键词
POSS复合树脂
弯曲强度
抗压强度
填料
polyhedral oligomeric silsesquioxane resin
flexure strenghth
compressive strength
filler
