Warning: mkdir(): Permission denied in /home/virtual/lib/view_data.php on line 81

Warning: fopen(upload/ip_log/ip_log_2024-12.txt): failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /home/virtual/lib/view_data.php on line 83

Warning: fwrite() expects parameter 1 to be resource, boolean given in /home/virtual/lib/view_data.php on line 84
Effect of infection control barrier thickness on light curing units

Effect of infection control barrier thickness on light curing units

Article information

Restor Dent Endod. 2010;35(5):368-373
Publication date (electronic) : 2010 September 30
doi : https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2010.35.5.368
Department of Conservative Dentistry, Wonkwang University College of Dentistry and Dental Research Institute, Iksan, Korea.
Correspondence to Hoon-Sang Chang, DDS, PhD. Assistant Professor, Department of Conservative Dentistry, Wonkwang University College of Dentistry and Dental Research Institute, 344-2 Shinyong-dong, Iksan, Korea 570-210. Tel, +82-63-859-2931; Fax, +82-63-859-2932; husch03@wonkwang.ac.kr
Received 2010 July 29; Revised 2010 August 12; Accepted 2010 August 26.

Abstract

Objectives

This study investigated the effect of infection control barrier thickness on power density, wavelength, and light diffusion of light curing units.

Materials and Methods

Infection control barrier (Cleanwrap) in one-fold, two-fold, four-fold, and eight-fold, and a halogen light curing unit (Optilux 360) and a light emitting diode (LED) light curing unit (Elipar FreeLight 2) were used in this study. Power density of light curing units with infection control barriers covering the fiberoptic bundle was measured with a hand held dental radiometer (Cure Rite). Wavelength of light curing units fixed on a custom made optical breadboard was measured with a portable spectroradiometer (CS-1000). Light diffusion of light curing units was photographed with DSLR (Nikon D70s) as above.

Results

Power density decreased significantly as the layer thickness of the infection control barrier increased, except the one-fold and two-fold in halogen light curing unit. Especially, when the barrier was four-fold and more in the halogen light curing unit, the decrease of power density was more prominent. The wavelength of light curing units was not affected by the barriers and almost no change was detected in the peak wavelength. Light diffusion of LED light curing unit was not affected by barriers, however, halogen light curing unit showed decrease in light diffusion angle when the barrier was four-fold and statistically different decrease when the barrier was eight-fold (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

It could be assumed that the infection control barriers should be used as two-fold rather than one-fold to prevent tearing of the barriers and subsequent cross contamination between the patients.

References

1. Caughman GB, Caughman WF, Napier N, Schuster GS. Disinfection of visible-light-curing devices. Oper Dent 1989. 14(1)2–7.
2. Kakaboura A, Tzoutzas J, Pitsinigos D, Vougiouklakis G. The effect of sterilization methods on the light transmission characteristics and structure of light-curing tips. J Oral Rehabil 2004. 31918–923.
3. Rueggeberg FA, Caughman WF, Comer RW. The effect of autoclaving on energy transmission through light-curing tips. J Am Dent Assoc 1996. 1271183–1187.
4. Nelson SK, Caughman WF, Rueggeberg FA, Lockwood PE. Effect of glutaraldehyde cold sterilants on light transmission of curing tips. Quintessence Int 1997. 28725–730.
5. Chong SL, Lam YK, Lee FKF, Ramalingam L, Yeo ACP, Lim CC. Effect of various infection-control methods for light-cure units on the cure of composite resins. Oper Dent 1998. 23150–154.
6. Pollington S, Kahakachchi N, van Noort R. The Influence of Plastic Light Cure Sheaths on the Hardness of Resin Composite. Oper Dent 2009. 34741–745.
7. Scott BA, Felix CA, Price RB. Effect of disposable infection control barriers on light output from dental curing lights. J Can Dent Assoc 2004. 70105–110.
8. Fan PL, Schumacher RM, Azzolin K, Geary R, Eichmiller FC. Curing-light intensity and depth of cure of resin-based composites tested according to international standards. J Am Dent Assoc 2002. 133429–434.
9. Park SM, Shin DH. Microhardness and microleakage of composite resin according to the change of curing light intensity. J Korean Acad Conserv Dent 2001. 26363–371.
10. Park JG, Cho BH, Lee IB, Kwon HC, Um CM. The effects of various light intensity on the polymerization of resin composites. J Korean Acad Conserv Dent 2001. 2686–94.
11. Shortall AC, Harrington E, Wilson HJ. Light curing unit effectiveness assessed by dental radiometers. J Dent 1995. 23227–232.
12. Rueggeberg FA. Precision of hand-held dental radiometers. Quintessence Int 1993. 24391–396.
13. Peutzfeldt A. Correlation between recordings obtained with a light-intensity tester and degree of conversion of a light-curing resin. Scand J Dent Res 1994. 10273–75.
14. Kim SY, Lee IB, Cho BH, Son HH, Kim MJ, Seok CI, et al. Dentin bond strength of bonding agents cured with Light Emitting Diode. J Korean Acad Conserv Dent 2004. 29504–514.
15. Price RB, Derand T, Sedarous M, Andreou P, Loney RW. Effect of distance on the power density from two light guides. J Esthet Dent 2000. 12320–327.
16. Corciolani G, Vichi A, Davidson CL, Ferrari M. The influence of tip geometry and distance on light-curing efficacy. Oper Dent 2008. 33325–331.

Article information Continued

Figure 1

Wavelength (nm) of LED light curing unit with infection control barriers covering the filberoptic bundle.

Figure 2

Wavelength (nm) of halogen light curing unit with infection control barriers covering the filberoptic bundle.

Figure 3

Light diffusion from LED light curing unit with infection control barriers covering the fiberoptic bundle.

Figure 4

Light diffusion from halogen light curing unit with infection control barriers covering the fiberoptic bundle.

Table 1

Power density (mW/cm2 ± SD) of light curing units with infection control barriers covering the fiberoptic bundle

Table 1

* The superscripts with the same letters are not significantly different at α = 0.05.

FL 2: Elipar FreeLight 2, O 360: Optilux 360.

Table 2

Light diffusion (degree ± SD) of light curing units with infection control barriers covering the fiberoptic bundle

Table 2

* The superscripts with the same letters are not significantly different at α = 0.05.

FL 2: Elipar FreeLight 2, O 360: Optilux 360.