ArticleThe journal of adhesive dentistry2022
Effects of C-Factor on Bond Strength of Universal Adhesives to Floor and Wall Dentin in Class-I Composite Restorations.
Article in The journal of adhesive dentistry, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Stress distribution in Class I composite restorations with polyethylene fiber wallpapering under different occlusal loads: A three-dimensional finite element analysis.Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics · 2026Article
- Role of configuration factor on bond strength of universal adhesives in occlusal cavities: AnJournal of conservative dentistry and endodontics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the effects of C-factor on the bond strength of universal adhesives to floor and wall dentin in class-I composite restorations using a bulk-fill composite. MATERIALS AND
methods108 non-carious humans third molars were randomly divided into four groups as follows: flat wall, flat floor, cavity wall, and cavity floor (n = 36). Then, each group was subdivided into three subgroups according to the type of adhesive used: Single Bond Universal, G-premio Bond (both universal adhesives), or Adper Single Bond 2 (an etch-and-rinse adhesive). After the bonding procedure, X-tra fill resin composite was applied in bulk to build up the flat surfaces or fill the cavities.Then the teeth were sectioned into 1-mm2 sticks and microtensile bond strength (µTBS) was measured using a universal testing machine. µTBS (MPa) was analyzed by one-way, two-way, and three-way ANOVA using SPSS Version 23 (a = 0.05).
resultsInteractions between adhesives and bonding surfaces, as well as C-factor and bonding surfaces showed statistically significant differences, but the interaction between the C-factor and type of adhesive was not statistically significant. The comparison of bonded surfaces including the flat wall and the flat floor in Adper Single Bond 2 was statistically significant (p < 0.05), except for the cavity wall and cavity floor.
conclusionRegardless of the type of adhesives, the C-factor reduced the µTBS of the composite resin to dentin. Adper Single Bond 2 mediated higher µTBS than did the universal adhesives G-premio Bond and Single Bond Universal.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.