H

a
r
d
n
e
s
s
Tests of Between-Subjects Effects
Dependent Variable: Hardness
Source Type III Sum df Mean Suare ! Si"
of Suares
#orrected Model
Intercept
$ESI%
DISI%!E#
TIMED&$
$ESI% ' DISI%!E#
$ESI% 'TIMED&$
DISI%!E#'TIMED&$
$ESI% ' DISI%!E#'
Error
Total
#orrected Total
a
()*+,-, ./
//00(-+./- /
.11 /
.+,-/ )
.0-+1.* *
/1+/.2 )
/)+-)2 *
/-+0*, /)
)+)/* /)
,(+1*1 /*0
//2.((+)/1 )/1
*1/+,2, )12
/)+0., )0+,(( 1+111
//00(-+./- )**1/0+- 1+111
1+.11 1+02. 1+-.*
)+-*( (+)2. 1+11*
01+(10 /01+/2- 1+111
(+1,. //+-(0 1+111
)+1(( .+(22 1+111
/+/(* )+(0* 1+11.
1+/0( 1+./- 1+2(,
1+..,
3:- $ Suared 4 1+0,( 53djusted $ Suared 4 1+0.(6
Table -: 3nalysis of Variance 53%7V36
Dependent Variable: Hardness
Multiple Comparisons
5I6 Disinfectant 586 Disinfectant Mean
Difference
5I-86
2(9 #onfidence Inter:al
Std+ Si"ni-
Error ficance ;ower Bound &pper Bound
Sodium Hypoc<loride #<lor<e=idine 2+/.-E-1- 1+//-1 /+111
1+)*./
1+)0).
#ontrol 1+-/-,'
1+//-1
1+1/0 1+(0*2 -.+1.20E-1)
#<lor<e=idine Sodium Hypoc<loride
-2+/.)2E-1-
1+//-1
/+111 1+)0). 1+)*./
#ontrol
1+-))2'
1+//-1
1+1/. 1+(2*/ -.+2*./E-1)
#ontrol Sodium Hypoc<loride
1+-/-,' 1+//-1 1+1/0 .+1(1E-1) 1+(0*2
#<lor<e=idine
1+-))2' 1+//-1 1+1/. .+2*.E-1)
1+(2*/
Based on obser:ed means
'T<e mean difference is si"nificant at t<e 1+1( le:el+
Table .: Multiple comparisons test
Mean Hardness of Conventional Resin
Sodium Hypochloride Chlor hexidine Control
-1
)(
)1
/(
/1
(
1
Baseline Post Disinfection 15 days 3 days ! days " days 1# days
$ime Duration
>rap< /: Mean <ardness of #on:entional resin
/12
E
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
d

M
a
r
"
i
n
a
l

M
e
a
n
s
Indian 8 Stomatol )1/)?-5)6:/1*-/)
Sodium Hypochloride Chlor hexidine Control
-1
)(
)1
/(
/1
(
1
Baseline Post
15 days 3 days ! days " days 1# days
Disinfection
>rap< ): Mean <ardness of Hi"< impact resin
%nteraction Plot &'tted means( for Hardness
)* $esin
#on:entional $esin
$esin ). Hi"< Impact $esin
))
)* Disinfectant
#<lor<e=idine
). #ontrol
Disinfectant Sodium Hypoc<loride
))
Time Duration
>rap< -: Multiple comparison test
)stimated Mar*inal Means of Hardness
),
)*
)(
).
)-
$esin
))
#on:entional $esin
)/
Hi"< impact $esin
Baseline /( days *1 days /)1 days
@ost Disinfection -1 days 21 days
Time Duration
>rap< .: Estimated mar"inal mean of bot< resins
//1
Indian 8 Stomatol )1/)?-5)6:/1*-/)
difference in <ardness was seen between con:entional and
<i"< impact resins 5@A1+1(6+ Bot< resins s<owed decrease
in <ardness immediately post disinfection 5after .0 <ours6+
$esults obtained by - way 3%7V3 s<owed no si"nificant
difference between t<e con:entional and <i"< impact
resins 5Table -6 5@A1+1(6+ T<e interaction 5joint effect6
between resin and disinfectant and between resin and time
duration was si"nificant 5@B1+11/6+ But t<e interaction
effect of all t<e t<ree factors was not si"nificant 5@A1+1(6+
To c<ecC si"nificant difference between pair of disinfec+
tantsD multiple comparison test was carried out usin"
BonferroniEs met<od 5Table .6+ $esults s<owed si"nificant
difference between all t<e time inter:als 5@B1+1(6 e=cept
*1 days and 21 days 5@A1+1(6 5>rap< -6+
T<e most important factor in t<is study was time duration
and it was seen t<at /)1 days yielded better <ardness
compared to ot<er time inter:als+ T<e results demonstrated
t<at initially con:entional resin s<owed sli"<tly <i"<er
mean <ardness :alues t<an <i"< impact resinD w<ic< was
not statistically si"nificant and was also re:ersed by t<e
end of /)1 days 5>rap< .6+
Discussion
Hardness measurements <a:e been used successfully as an
indirect met<od of e:aluatin" dept< of polymeriFation of
)
denture base resin materials+ Hardness <as been found to
be sensiti:e to residual monomer content in t<e polyme+
riFed resin+ It is probable t<at residual monomer ad:ersely
affects properties of resins by plasticiFin" effectD w<ic<
effecti:ely reduces interc<ain forces causin" deformation
-
under load+
$esidual monomer is t<e primary cause of aller"y to t<e
mucous membrane+ Increased temperatures and e=tended
polymeriFation times <a:e s<own decrease in residual
monomer content+ Tsuc<iya et al+D demonstrated t<at t<e
residual monomer content of denture base materials is
lowered to a uarter of t<e initial :alue if t<e denture is
immersed in water at (1G# for / <our after polymeriFation+ .
Studies done by Vallittu et al+D su""est storin" t<e newly
fabricated denture in water at -,G# for / or ) days before
useD as it decreases t<e amount of residual monomer in t<e
(
denture and t<e release of t<e same into t<e sali:a+
In :i:oD t<e denture base is e=posed to a bat< of sali:a
w<ic< results in optimum water saturation+ Heepin" t<is in
mindD all t<e test samples were immersed in water for .
mont<s at -,G# to pro:ide optimum water saturation in
denture base resins+
Impro:ement in t<e <ardness property <as been attributed
in part to leac<in" of t<e residual monomer from t<e resin+
T<e rate of diffusion of t<e monomer out of t<e resin into
water decreases pro"ressi:ely and t<e process is essen+
tially complete after appro=imately /. days+ 3not<er
mec<anism related to monomer reduction in:ol:es furt<er
polymeriFation of t<e residual monomer due to acti:e
radicals remainin" in t<e polymeriFed acrylic resin+
#<emical disinfectants are a recommended met<od to
pre:ent cross contamination w<en used after remo:al and
before insertion of prost<esis into t<e mout<+ Studies by
@a:arina et al+D noticed a continuous decrease in <ardness
on immersin" t<e denture teet< in water and also in
disinfectin" solutions+ T<is permits t<e rela=ation of stre+
*
sses incurred durin" polymeriFation+
///
It seems t<at water molecules may interfere wit<
entan"lement of polymer c<ains and t<ereby c<an"e t<e
p<ysical c<aracteristics of t<e resultant polymer+ , T<e
resistance to t<ese c<an"es <as been s<own to reduce w<en
cross-linCed resins are used in preference to linear linCa"e
polymers since t<ey <a:e impro:ed p<ysical properties
and are more superior to con:entional denture base resins+
Sodium <ypoc<lorite 51+()(96 and c<lor<e=idine 5.96
were selected as t<ey <a:e pro:ed efficient by not alterin"
t<e p<ysical properties of resins muc<+ I<en t<e repeated
<ardness measurements of t<e same specimens 5before and
after disinfection6 were compared 5Table /D)6 a sli"<t but
si"nificant decrease in <ardness was obser:ed immedia+
tely after disinfection+ Howe:er t<e decrease in <ardness
resultin" from disinfection procedures was si"nificantly
re:ersed after /( days of stora"e in water+ It is presumable
t<at t<ese processes could <elp o:ercome any possible
ad:erse effect of t<e disinfectant solutions on t<e surface
<ardness of acrylic resins+
$esults from Table / and ) s<owed no si"nificant differ+
ence between bot< t<e resins 5@A1+1(6+ In con:entional
resinD t<e increase in <ardness after polymeriFation could
be due to t<e presence of :aryin" amounts of unreacted
residual monomer+ 3crylic resinD bein" a polar materialD
effecti:ely absorbs water by diffusion+ Immediately after
polymeriFationD ) processes reduce t<e concentration of
residual monomerD firstD diffusion from t<e polymer and
furt<er polymeriFation at t<e site of polymer radicals in t<e
matri= and secondlyD since water molecules act as a plasti+
ciFerD it facilitates t<e flow of lon" c<ain polymers t<us
/
increasin" t<e de"ree of polymeriFation+
Hi"< impact resin 5;ucitone /226 primarily contains pre
polymeriFed poly met<yl met<acrylate 5@MM36 powderD
met<yl met<acrylate 5MM36 monomer and cross linCin"
a"ent et<ylene "lycol dimet<acrylate 5E>DM36+ E>DM3
is c<emically and structurally similar to MM3 and may be
incorporated in t<e "rowin" c<ain itselfD facilitatin" t<e
interlinCin" of two adjacent c<ains+ T<is assures a "reater
interlinCin" of polymer c<ains and increases t<e stren"t<
0
and stiffness of t<e resultant resin+
3 si"nificant difference was seen between t<e two disinfe+
ctants 5@B1+1(6+ !or bot< resinsD all specimens s<owed a
sli"<t but si"nificant decrease in <ardness :alues after
immersion in sodium <ypoc<lorite+ It may be assumed t<at t<e
sodium <ypoc<lorite solution may <a:e penetrated into t<e
tested materials and resulted in softenin"+
3sad et al+D reported si"nificant decrease in <ardness w<en
specimens were immersed in 1+(9 c<lor<e=idine "lucon+
,
ate solution for , days+ T<is c<an"e was related to t<e slow
absorption of t<e disinfectin" c<emicals into t<e resin
resultin" in some structural c<an"e in t<e polymer+
In t<e present studyD .9 c<lor<e=idine "luconate solution
was used for disinfection+ T<erefore t<e decrease in <ardn+
ess for bot< t<e resins may be attributed to t<e <i"< conc+
entration 5.96 of c<lor<e=idine "luconate+ T<e use of t<is
concentration was based on a pre:ious study t<at e:aluated
t<e clinical effecti:eness of an infection control protocol
for cleansin" and disinfectin" remo:able dental prost<+
eses+ T<e aut<ors obser:ed t<at .9 c<lor<e=idine "lucon+
ate was effecti:e w<en immersed for /1 minutes in reduc+
"
in" t<e number of micro-or"anisms on t<e dentures+
!or bot< t<e materials testedD t<e decrease in <ardness was
3TTE%TI7%J
T$I3; ;IMIT3TI7% - 7%;K - SE;E#TED @3>ES M3K BE #7%VE$TED @E$ #7%VE$SI7%+
@&$#H3SI%> 3 ;I#E%SE $EM7VES THIS ;IMIT3TI7%+ T7 D7 S7D @;E3SE #;I#H 7% THE !7;;7II%> ;I%H:
<ttp:LLwww+in:estintec<+comLorderMa)eMpro+<tm