JDR JDR Most Read Articles
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Tantbirojn, D.
Right arrow Articles by Douglas, W. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Tantbirojn, D.
Right arrow Articles by Douglas, W. H.

Journal of Dental Research, Vol 79, 41-48, Copyright © 2000 by International & American Associations for Dental Research Online Journals

ARTICLES

Nominal shear or fracture mechanics in the assessment of composite-dentin adhesion?

D. Tantbirojn, Y. S. Cheng, A. Versluis, J. S. Hodges and W. H. Douglas
Minnesota Dental Research Center for Biomaterials and Biomechanics, Department of Oral Science, University of Minnesota School of Dentistry, Minneapolis 55455, USA. Daranee.Ta@chula.ac.th

This study addresses the anticipated problem of discriminating among high-performing dentin adhesives. The simplicity of the nominal shear bond test, despite being heavily criticized, has made it a routine procedure for the determination of bonding efficacy. A fracture mechanics approach has been suggested as a better assessment of bonding efficacy (Versluis et al., 1997). However, experimental complexity is a major limitation. It is hypothesized that a new, simplified interfacial fracture toughness test (Lin, 1994) will evaluate bonding agents differently if compared with the traditional shear bond test. Therefore, the objective of this study was to compare the performances of six dentin bonding agents subjected to the interfacial fracture toughness test (critical plane strain energy release rate) or to the nominal shear bond test (shear bond strength). Their performances were also characterized by scanning electron micrography of the fracture surfaces for evidence of dentin cohesive failure. Statistical analyses showed only marginal differences between these determinants of the two tests. However, when the analysis was applied only to the materials that had 100% frequency of dentin cohesive failure in shear testing, which also had high bonding efficacy, the difference in adhesive strengths between the two tests became significant. The reliability of the nominal shear test is questioned when dentin cohesive failure occurs, which usually is associated with high bonding efficacy. Since it is expected that bonding efficacy will increase further, the interfacial fracture toughness test is the preferred methodology to distinguish among high-performing dentin adhesives.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J. Dent. Res.Home page
J. De Munck, K. Van Landuyt, M. Peumans, A. Poitevin, P. Lambrechts, M. Braem, and B. Van Meerbeek
A Critical Review of the Durability of Adhesion to Tooth Tissue: Methods and Results
J. Dent. Res., February 1, 2005; 84(2): 118 - 132.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
IADR Journals Advances in Dental Research ®
Journal of Dental Research ® Critical Reviews (1990-2004)
Copyright © 2000 Institutional Access Guidelines