ArticleBMC oral health2026
Effect of three-body wear on the surface properties of different polymer-based CAD/CAM dental restorative and prosthetic materials.
Article in BMC oral health, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundComputer aided designed/ computer aided manufactured (CAD/CAM) materials offer diverse options for prosthetic rehabilitations, yet correlation between materials' surface properties and aging through chewing simulation needs characterization. The aim of this study is to measure and evaluate the effect of three body wear on three CAD/CAM materials (poly methylmethacrylate (PMMA), composite resin and polyether ether ketone (PEEK)) regarding their microhardness and surface roughness.
methodsSeventy-two disc-shaped specimens (20 × 6 mm) were fabricated (n = 24/ group) from PMMA (Yamahachi PMMA Disk), Nano-ceramic Composite (Grandio Blocs, VOCO), and PEEK (BioHPP, Bredent). Specimens were subjected to 120,000 chewing cycles in a chewing simulator using a 3-body wear protocol with a pumice slurry. Wear volume (mm
resultsOne-way ANOVA revealed a significant difference between material types (P = 0.000*), with composite exhibiting the lowest mean volume loss (0.08 mm
conclusionThe 3-body wear simulation induced significantly different volumetric loss across all groups, with the magnitude of loss largely dependent on the material's specific composition and baseline hardness. In addition, the surface roughness and microhardness of three investigated materials were considerably impacted by three-body wear. PMMA have the lowest wear resistance, lowest microhardness, and the greatest surface roughness both before and after wear, while composites with high filler loading and high microhardness have the highest wear resistance followed by PEEK. After wear, the surface roughness of the composite is acceptable.
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.