ArticleBMC oral health2024
Effect of various surface coating methods on surface roughness, micromorphological analysis and fluoride release from contemporary glass ionomer restorations.
Article in BMC oral health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical performance of alkasite and glass-hybrid restorations compared with resin composite in class II cavities: a randomized clinical trial.Clinical oral investigations · 2026Trial
- Evaluation of pediatric drugs on the surface roughness of primary enamel and restorative materials: an in vitro study.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Impact of modeling resin application techniques on the color stability and fluoride release from Giomer restorative material (an in vitro study).BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Bletilla striata polysaccharide modified glass ionomer cement: enhanced mechanical and biological properties.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Surface treatments and coatings of hybrid glass ionomer cement to improve mechanical and physical properties.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The in vitro effect of electronic versus conventional cigarettes on color stability and surface roughness of dental resin composites.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Evaluation of Factors Affecting Fluoride Release from Dental Sealants: A Systematic Review.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- The effect of different glass ionomer cements and surface coating applications on fluoride release and microhardness values.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Elemental and micromorphological analysis of ion releasing restoration/carious dentin interface.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Development of a smoking simulation machine to evaluate the effects of smoking on the color change of dental restorative materials.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Comparative measurement of short-term fluoride release and inhibition of caries around restoration by ion releasing restorative materials: an in vitro study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The evaluation of internal adaptation of glass ionomer restorations applied after the use of different cavity conditioners in primary teeth: an in-vitro study.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Elemental analysis and micromorphological patterns of tooth/restoration interface of three ion-releasing class V restorations.BMC oral health · 2024Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the effect of various surface coating methods on surface roughness, micromorphological analysis and fluoride release from contemporary resin-modified and conventional glass ionomer restorations. MATERIALS &
methodsA total of 72 permanent human molars were used in this study. The teeth were randomly assigned into 2 groups according to type of restorative materials used; resin modified glass ionomer cement and conventional glass ionomer (SDI Limited. Bayswater Victoria, Australia). Each group was subdivided into 3 subgroups according to the application of coat material; Sub-group1: without application of coat; Sub-group2: manufacturer recommended coat was applied and sub-group3: customized (vaseline) coat was applied. Each group was then subdivided into two divisions according to the time of testing; immediate (after 24 h) and delayed (after 6 months of storage). Three specimens from each sub-group were selected for surface roughness test (AFM) and another 3 specimens for the micromorphological analysis using scanning electron microscope (SEM). For the fluoride release test, a total of 60 cylindrical discs were used (n = 60). The discs were randomly split into 2 groups according to type of restorative materials used (n = 30); resin modified glass ionomer cement and conventional glass ionomer. Each group was subdivided into 3 subgroups (n = 10) according to the application of the coat material; Sub-group1: without application of coat; Sub-group2: with the manufacturer recommended coat and sub-group3: with application of customized (vaseline) coat. Data for each test was then collected, tabulated, were collected, tabulated, and tested for the normality with Shapiro-Wilk test. Based on the outcome of normality test, the significant effects of variables were assessed using appropriate statistical analysis testing methods.
resultsRegarding the data obtained from surface roughness test, Shapiro-Wilk test showed normal distribution pattern of all values (p > 0.05). Accordingly, Two-way ANOVA outcome showed that the 'type of restoration' or 'test time' had statistically significant effect on the AFM test (p < 0.05). Regarding Fluoride specific ion electrode test 2-way ANOVA followed by Least Significant Difference (LSD) Post-hoc test revealed significant difference among the groups (p < 0.05). It showed that SDI GIC group after 14 days of measurement had the highest mean of fluoride release (36.38 ± 3.16 PPM) and SDI RMGIC after 30 days of measurement had the second highest mean of fluoride release (43.28 ± 1.89 PPM). Finally, regarding the micromorphological analysis using SEM, a slight difference was observed between the studied groups.
conclusionsBased on the results of this study, various coatings enhance surface roughness in the initial 24 h of restoration insertion. Different coat types seems that have no influence on fluoride release and the micromorphological features of the restoration/dentin interface.
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.