An investigation of the tear energy of five soft lining materials.

The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the tear energy of three silicone rubber materials and two acrylic resin soft lining materials in different solutions and times of storage. The tear energy of specimens stored in artificial saliva, denture cleanser and distilled water was measured over 1, 4, and 16 weeks, using a tensile testing machine. Data were analyzed with a one-way analysis of variance and a Duncan multiple comparison test. Silicone rubber materials had the least tear energy. The type of material, time of storage and solution were statistically significant factors affecting on tear energy. The ability of the material to resist rupture during normal use (including constantly being in saliva and usually immersed in denture cleanser or water for storage) is of practical importance.

[1]  M. Grace,et al.  Effect of denture cleansers, surface finish, and temperature on Molloplast B resilient liner color, hardness, and texture. , 2000, Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists.

[2]  J. Drummond,et al.  Comparative study of water sorption, solubility, and tensile bond strength of two soft lining materials. , 2000, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[3]  M. Waters,et al.  Mechanical properties of an experimental denture soft lining material. , 1999, Journal of dentistry.

[4]  M. Braden,et al.  Soft acrylic resin materials containing a polymerisable plasticiser II: water absorption characteristics. , 1999, Biomaterials.

[5]  P. Wright,et al.  Adhesion and tear energy of a long-term soft lining material activated by rapid microwave energy. , 1998, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[6]  M. Braden,et al.  Soft lining materials--a review. , 1995, The European journal of prosthodontics and restorative dentistry.

[7]  H. Nikawa,et al.  Effects of denture cleansers on direct soft denture lining materials. , 1994, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[8]  R. G. Craig,et al.  Physical property comparison of 11 soft denture lining materials as a function of accelerated aging. , 1993, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[9]  W. Murphy,et al.  Bond strength and rupture properties of some soft denture liners. , 1992, Journal of oral rehabilitation.

[10]  A. Harrison,et al.  The compatibility of temporary soft materials with immersion denture cleansers. , 1989, The International journal of prosthodontics.

[11]  M. Braden,et al.  Water absorption of methacrylate soft lining materials. , 1989, Biomaterials.

[12]  M. Kazanji,et al.  Soft lining materials: their absorption of, and solubility in, artificial saliva , 1988, British Dental Journal.

[13]  P. Wright.  The success and failure of denture soft-lining materials in clinical use. , 1984, Journal of dentistry.

[14]  D. E. Smith,et al.  The effect of denture cleansers on temporary soft liners. , 1983, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[15]  M. Braden,et al.  Water Absorption and Water Solubility of Soft Lining Materials for Acrylic Dentures , 1983, Journal of dental research.

[16]  P. Wright.  Characterization of the Adhesion of Soft Lining Materials to Poly (methyl methacrylate) , 1982, Journal of dental research.

[17]  M. Braden,et al.  New soft lining materials. , 1982, Journal of dentistry.

[18]  P. Wright.  Characterization of the Rupture Properties of Denture Soft Lining Materials , 1980, Journal of dental research.

[19]  P. Wright.  Soft lining materials: their status and prospects. , 1976, Journal of dentistry.

[20]  Revised American Dental Association specification no. 12 for denture base polymers. , 1975, Journal of the American Dental Association.

[21]  D. H. Bell.  Clinical evaluation of a resilient denture liner. , 1970, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry (Print).

[22]  F. A. Peyton,et al.  Properties of resilient denture liners in simulated mouth conditions , 1962 .