ArticleBrazilian oral research2025
Evaluating microbial load on dental curing lights and the impact of protective barriers on resin composites.
Article in Brazilian oral research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The contamination of dental curing light tips was evaluated before and after treatment and after their use and disinfection. The influence of a plastic protective barrier over the flexural strength and the modulus of elasticity of resin composites were also analyzed. Microbiological sampling was conducted at initial contamination (T0), in Log 10 CFU/4 mL; after dental treatment (T1); and after disinfection with 70% ethanol (v/v) (T2). The results were analyzed by descriptive statistics and analysis of variance. The flexural strength and the modulus of elasticity analyses were performed using bar-shaped test specimens of three commercial resin composites with and without barriers, and the tests were subjected to a statistical normality test. Turbidity was observed in the media in 60.7% of the tubes at T0, 100.0% at T1, and 57.1% at T2. The microbial contamination was similar at T0 and T2, but a significant increase was observed at T1. The recovered microbial load differed significantly between T1 and T2 (p < 0.05). The results of the flexural strength and modulus of elasticity analyses showed no significant differences with or without a barrier for any of the different colors of resin, polymerization time, or the three resins. Under the present experimental conditions, 70% ethanol significantly reduced the levels of microbial contamination, but it did not guarantee the inactivation of all microbial cells. The use of plastic protective barriers did not alter the flexural strength or the modulus of elasticity of any of the tested resin composites, indicating that they are a safe and viable measure to prevent cross-contamination when using a dental curing light.
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.