Clinical discrimination between autoglazed and polished porcelain surfaces
Identifieur interne : 005B28 ( Istex/Corpus ); précédent : 005B27; suivant : 005B29Clinical discrimination between autoglazed and polished porcelain surfaces
Auteurs : Jane D. Brewer ; Davis A. Garlapo ; Edward A. Chipps ; Lisa A. TedescoSource :
- The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry [ 0022-3913 ] ; 1990.
English descriptors
- KwdEn :
- Abraded, Autoglazed, Brewer, Crown, Dent, Different methods, Dullness, Elastomer, Evaluation form, Evaluator groups, Excess bulk, Inaccurate impression, Likert scales, Outline form, Outline form sharpness, Porcelain, Porcelain surface, Porcelain surfaces, Porosity, Prostaet dent, Prosthetic dentistry, Prosthodontics, Prosthodontist, Provisional restoration, Putty, Putty impression, Reflectance, Sharpness, Significant differences, Silicone elastomers, Standard deviations, Surface porosity, Surface smoothness, Surface treatments, Uniform wash space, Visual inspection differences, Wash material.
- Teeft :
- Abraded, Autoglazed, Brewer, Crown, Dent, Different methods, Dullness, Elastomer, Evaluation form, Evaluator groups, Excess bulk, Inaccurate impression, Likert scales, Outline form, Outline form sharpness, Porcelain, Porcelain surface, Porcelain surfaces, Porosity, Prostaet dent, Prosthetic dentistry, Prosthodontics, Prosthodontist, Provisional restoration, Putty, Putty impression, Reflectance, Sharpness, Significant differences, Silicone elastomers, Standard deviations, Surface porosity, Surface smoothness, Surface treatments, Uniform wash space, Visual inspection differences, Wash material.
Abstract
Abstract: Precementation refinements of porcelain-fused-to-metal crowns often require reglazing or polishing of the porcelain surface. This study was done to determine whether visual inspection differences exist between glazed and polished porcelain surfaces. Prosthodontists, general dentists, and students (six in each group) rated esthetic properties of 12 porcelain-fused-to-metal crowns. All crowns were initially autoglazed. For phase 1 observations, six crowns were air abraded and polished and six retained their glazed surface. For phase 2 observations, the surface treatments were reversed. At both observations, crowns were rated on 5-point Likert scales for outline form, porosity, smoothness, reflectance, texture, dullness, defects, and general esthetic appearances. Phase 1 polished and glazed crowns had different means for outline form sharpness, porosity, reflectance, dullness, and general esthetic appearance. Phase 2 crowns were different for dullness. Polished and glazed crowns alike were more dull at phase 1 than at phase 2. Glazed crowns were different between phases for reflectance and general esthetic apperance. All reported differences were significant at p <.01. Significant differences occurred among raters with polished and glazed crowns for several variables.
Url:
DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(90)90284-J
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:B72E6E5934AC7E8201B2AA85F19B72B569852A6CLe document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title>Clinical discrimination between autoglazed and polished porcelain surfaces</title><author><name sortKey="Brewer, Jane D" sort="Brewer, Jane D" uniqKey="Brewer J" first="Jane D." last="Brewer">Jane D. Brewer</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>State University of New York at Buffalo, School of Dental Medicine, Buffalo, N.Y. USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Garlapo, Davis A" sort="Garlapo, Davis A" uniqKey="Garlapo D" first="Davis A." last="Garlapo">Davis A. Garlapo</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>State University of New York at Buffalo, School of Dental Medicine, Buffalo, N.Y. USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Chipps, Edward A" sort="Chipps, Edward A" uniqKey="Chipps E" first="Edward A." last="Chipps">Edward A. Chipps</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>State University of New York at Buffalo, School of Dental Medicine, Buffalo, N.Y. USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Tedesco, Lisa A" sort="Tedesco, Lisa A" uniqKey="Tedesco L" first="Lisa A." last="Tedesco">Lisa A. Tedesco</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>State University of New York at Buffalo, School of Dental Medicine, Buffalo, N.Y. USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:B72E6E5934AC7E8201B2AA85F19B72B569852A6C</idno><date when="1990" year="1990">1990</date><idno type="doi">10.1016/0022-3913(90)90284-J</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/B72E6E5934AC7E8201B2AA85F19B72B569852A6C/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">005B28</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">005B28</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a">Clinical discrimination between autoglazed and polished porcelain surfaces</title><author><name sortKey="Brewer, Jane D" sort="Brewer, Jane D" uniqKey="Brewer J" first="Jane D." last="Brewer">Jane D. Brewer</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>State University of New York at Buffalo, School of Dental Medicine, Buffalo, N.Y. USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Garlapo, Davis A" sort="Garlapo, Davis A" uniqKey="Garlapo D" first="Davis A." last="Garlapo">Davis A. Garlapo</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>State University of New York at Buffalo, School of Dental Medicine, Buffalo, N.Y. USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Chipps, Edward A" sort="Chipps, Edward A" uniqKey="Chipps E" first="Edward A." last="Chipps">Edward A. Chipps</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>State University of New York at Buffalo, School of Dental Medicine, Buffalo, N.Y. USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Tedesco, Lisa A" sort="Tedesco, Lisa A" uniqKey="Tedesco L" first="Lisa A." last="Tedesco">Lisa A. Tedesco</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>State University of New York at Buffalo, School of Dental Medicine, Buffalo, N.Y. USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j">The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry</title><title level="j" type="abbrev">YMPR</title><idno type="ISSN">0022-3913</idno><imprint><publisher>ELSEVIER</publisher><date type="published" when="1990">1990</date><biblScope unit="volume">64</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">6</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="631">631</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="635">635</biblScope></imprint><idno type="ISSN">0022-3913</idno></series></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">0022-3913</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>Abraded</term><term>Autoglazed</term><term>Brewer</term><term>Crown</term><term>Dent</term><term>Different methods</term><term>Dullness</term><term>Elastomer</term><term>Evaluation form</term><term>Evaluator groups</term><term>Excess bulk</term><term>Inaccurate impression</term><term>Likert scales</term><term>Outline form</term><term>Outline form sharpness</term><term>Porcelain</term><term>Porcelain surface</term><term>Porcelain surfaces</term><term>Porosity</term><term>Prostaet dent</term><term>Prosthetic dentistry</term><term>Prosthodontics</term><term>Prosthodontist</term><term>Provisional restoration</term><term>Putty</term><term>Putty impression</term><term>Reflectance</term><term>Sharpness</term><term>Significant differences</term><term>Silicone elastomers</term><term>Standard deviations</term><term>Surface porosity</term><term>Surface smoothness</term><term>Surface treatments</term><term>Uniform wash space</term><term>Visual inspection differences</term><term>Wash material</term></keywords><keywords scheme="Teeft" xml:lang="en"><term>Abraded</term><term>Autoglazed</term><term>Brewer</term><term>Crown</term><term>Dent</term><term>Different methods</term><term>Dullness</term><term>Elastomer</term><term>Evaluation form</term><term>Evaluator groups</term><term>Excess bulk</term><term>Inaccurate impression</term><term>Likert scales</term><term>Outline form</term><term>Outline form sharpness</term><term>Porcelain</term><term>Porcelain surface</term><term>Porcelain surfaces</term><term>Porosity</term><term>Prostaet dent</term><term>Prosthetic dentistry</term><term>Prosthodontics</term><term>Prosthodontist</term><term>Provisional restoration</term><term>Putty</term><term>Putty impression</term><term>Reflectance</term><term>Sharpness</term><term>Significant differences</term><term>Silicone elastomers</term><term>Standard deviations</term><term>Surface porosity</term><term>Surface smoothness</term><term>Surface treatments</term><term>Uniform wash space</term><term>Visual inspection differences</term><term>Wash material</term></keywords></textClass><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">Abstract: Precementation refinements of porcelain-fused-to-metal crowns often require reglazing or polishing of the porcelain surface. This study was done to determine whether visual inspection differences exist between glazed and polished porcelain surfaces. Prosthodontists, general dentists, and students (six in each group) rated esthetic properties of 12 porcelain-fused-to-metal crowns. All crowns were initially autoglazed. For phase 1 observations, six crowns were air abraded and polished and six retained their glazed surface. For phase 2 observations, the surface treatments were reversed. At both observations, crowns were rated on 5-point Likert scales for outline form, porosity, smoothness, reflectance, texture, dullness, defects, and general esthetic appearances. Phase 1 polished and glazed crowns had different means for outline form sharpness, porosity, reflectance, dullness, and general esthetic appearance. Phase 2 crowns were different for dullness. Polished and glazed crowns alike were more dull at phase 1 than at phase 2. Glazed crowns were different between phases for reflectance and general esthetic apperance. All reported differences were significant at p <.01. Significant differences occurred among raters with polished and glazed crowns for several variables.</div></front></TEI><istex><corpusName>elsevier</corpusName><keywords><teeft><json:string>prosthodontics</json:string><json:string>putty</json:string><json:string>significant differences</json:string><json:string>autoglazed</json:string><json:string>dullness</json:string><json:string>reflectance</json:string><json:string>abraded</json:string><json:string>outline form</json:string><json:string>wash material</json:string><json:string>putty impression</json:string><json:string>outline form sharpness</json:string><json:string>prosthodontist</json:string><json:string>standard deviations</json:string><json:string>elastomer</json:string><json:string>porcelain</json:string><json:string>surface treatments</json:string><json:string>prosthetic dentistry</json:string><json:string>porcelain surfaces</json:string><json:string>porosity</json:string><json:string>different methods</json:string><json:string>porcelain surface</json:string><json:string>visual inspection differences</json:string><json:string>evaluation form</json:string><json:string>likert scales</json:string><json:string>surface porosity</json:string><json:string>provisional restoration</json:string><json:string>evaluator groups</json:string><json:string>surface smoothness</json:string><json:string>inaccurate impression</json:string><json:string>silicone elastomers</json:string><json:string>excess bulk</json:string><json:string>uniform wash space</json:string><json:string>prostaet dent</json:string><json:string>sharpness</json:string><json:string>brewer</json:string><json:string>dent</json:string><json:string>crown</json:string></teeft></keywords><author><json:item><name>Jane D. Brewer D.D.S., M.S.</name><affiliations><json:string>State University of New York at Buffalo, School of Dental Medicine, Buffalo, N.Y. USA</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Davis A. Garlapo D.D.S.</name><affiliations><json:string>State University of New York at Buffalo, School of Dental Medicine, Buffalo, N.Y. USA</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Edward A. Chipps D.D.S.</name><affiliations><json:string>State University of New York at Buffalo, School of Dental Medicine, Buffalo, N.Y. USA</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Lisa A. Tedesco Ph.D.</name><affiliations><json:string>State University of New York at Buffalo, School of Dental Medicine, Buffalo, N.Y. USA</json:string></affiliations></json:item></author><arkIstex>ark:/67375/6H6-KR500101-M</arkIstex><language><json:string>eng</json:string></language><originalGenre><json:string>Full-length article</json:string></originalGenre><abstract>Abstract: Precementation refinements of porcelain-fused-to-metal crowns often require reglazing or polishing of the porcelain surface. This study was done to determine whether visual inspection differences exist between glazed and polished porcelain surfaces. Prosthodontists, general dentists, and students (six in each group) rated esthetic properties of 12 porcelain-fused-to-metal crowns. All crowns were initially autoglazed. For phase 1 observations, six crowns were air abraded and polished and six retained their glazed surface. For phase 2 observations, the surface treatments were reversed. At both observations, crowns were rated on 5-point Likert scales for outline form, porosity, smoothness, reflectance, texture, dullness, defects, and general esthetic appearances. Phase 1 polished and glazed crowns had different means for outline form sharpness, porosity, reflectance, dullness, and general esthetic appearance. Phase 2 crowns were different for dullness. Polished and glazed crowns alike were more dull at phase 1 than at phase 2. Glazed crowns were different between phases for reflectance and general esthetic apperance. All reported differences were significant at p >.01. Significant differences occurred among raters with polished and glazed crowns for several variables.</abstract><qualityIndicators><refBibsNative>true</refBibsNative><abstractWordCount>177</abstractWordCount><abstractCharCount>1295</abstractCharCount><keywordCount>0</keywordCount><score>5.934</score><pdfWordCount>1810</pdfWordCount><pdfCharCount>15358</pdfCharCount><pdfVersion>1.3</pdfVersion><pdfPageCount>5</pdfPageCount><pdfPageSize>612.28 x 828 pts</pdfPageSize></qualityIndicators><title>Clinical discrimination between autoglazed and polished porcelain surfaces</title><pmid><json:string>2079666</json:string></pmid><pii><json:string>0022-3913(90)90284-J</json:string></pii><genre><json:string>research-article</json:string></genre><host><title>The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry</title><language><json:string>unknown</json:string></language><publicationDate>1990</publicationDate><issn><json:string>0022-3913</json:string></issn><pii><json:string>S0022-3913(00)X0091-1</json:string></pii><volume>64</volume><issue>6</issue><pages><first>631</first><last>635</last></pages><genre><json:string>journal</json:string></genre></host><namedEntities><unitex><date><json:string>1990</json:string><json:string>1900</json:string></date><geogName></geogName><orgName><json:string>American Association for Dental Research</json:string><json:string>Department of Fixed Prosthodontics</json:string></orgName><orgName_funder></orgName_funder><orgName_provider></orgName_provider><persName><json:string>Professor</json:string><json:string>Edward A. Chipps</json:string><json:string>A. Comparison</json:string><json:string>Davis A. Garlapo</json:string><json:string>P. Polished</json:string></persName><placeName><json:string>Buffalo</json:string><json:string>N.Y.</json:string><json:string>Chicago</json:string></placeName><ref_url></ref_url><ref_bibl><json:string>Table ET AL</json:string></ref_bibl><bibl></bibl></unitex></namedEntities><ark><json:string>ark:/67375/6H6-KR500101-M</json:string></ark><categories><wos><json:string>1 - science</json:string><json:string>2 - dentistry, oral surgery & medicine</json:string></wos><scienceMetrix><json:string>1 - health sciences</json:string><json:string>2 - clinical medicine</json:string><json:string>3 - dentistry</json:string></scienceMetrix><scopus><json:string>1 - Health Sciences</json:string><json:string>2 - Dentistry</json:string><json:string>3 - Oral Surgery</json:string></scopus><inist><json:string>1 - sciences appliquees, technologies et medecines</json:string><json:string>2 - sciences biologiques et medicales</json:string><json:string>3 - sciences biologiques fondamentales et appliquees. psychologie</json:string><json:string>4 - productions animales</json:string></inist></categories><publicationDate>1990</publicationDate><copyrightDate>1990</copyrightDate><doi><json:string>10.1016/0022-3913(90)90284-J</json:string></doi><id>B72E6E5934AC7E8201B2AA85F19B72B569852A6C</id><score>1</score><fulltext><json:item><extension>pdf</extension><original>true</original><mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/B72E6E5934AC7E8201B2AA85F19B72B569852A6C/fulltext/pdf</uri></json:item><json:item><extension>zip</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/zip</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/B72E6E5934AC7E8201B2AA85F19B72B569852A6C/fulltext/zip</uri></json:item><istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/B72E6E5934AC7E8201B2AA85F19B72B569852A6C/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a">Clinical discrimination between autoglazed and polished porcelain surfaces</title></titleStmt><publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority><publisher>ELSEVIER</publisher><availability><p>ELSEVIER</p></availability><date>1990</date></publicationStmt><notesStmt><note>Presented at the American Association for Dental Research meeting, Chicago, Ill.</note></notesStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct type="inbook"><analytic><title level="a">Clinical discrimination between autoglazed and polished porcelain surfaces</title><author xml:id="author-0000"><persName><forename type="first">Jane D.</forename><surname>Brewer</surname></persName><roleName type="degree">D.D.S., M.S.</roleName><note type="biography">Reprint requests to: Dr. Jane D. Brewer School of Dental Medicine Suny at Buffalo Buffalo, NY 14214</note><note type="biography">Assistant Professor, Department of Fixed Prosthodontics.</note><affiliation>Reprint requests to: Dr. Jane D. Brewer School of Dental Medicine Suny at Buffalo Buffalo, NY 14214</affiliation><affiliation>Assistant Professor, Department of Fixed Prosthodontics.</affiliation><affiliation>State University of New York at Buffalo, School of Dental Medicine, Buffalo, N.Y. USA</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0001"><persName><forename type="first">Davis A.</forename><surname>Garlapo</surname></persName><roleName type="degree">D.D.S.</roleName><note type="biography">Professor and Chairman, Department of Fixed Prosthodontics.</note><affiliation>Professor and Chairman, Department of Fixed Prosthodontics.</affiliation><affiliation>State University of New York at Buffalo, School of Dental Medicine, Buffalo, N.Y. USA</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0002"><persName><forename type="first">Edward A.</forename><surname>Chipps</surname></persName><roleName type="degree">D.D.S.</roleName><affiliation>State University of New York at Buffalo, School of Dental Medicine, Buffalo, N.Y. USA</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0003"><persName><forename type="first">Lisa A.</forename><surname>Tedesco</surname></persName><roleName type="degree">Ph.D.</roleName><affiliation>State University of New York at Buffalo, School of Dental Medicine, Buffalo, N.Y. USA</affiliation></author><idno type="istex">B72E6E5934AC7E8201B2AA85F19B72B569852A6C</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1016/0022-3913(90)90284-J</idno><idno type="PII">0022-3913(90)90284-J</idno></analytic><monogr><title level="j">The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry</title><title level="j" type="abbrev">YMPR</title><idno type="pISSN">0022-3913</idno><idno type="PII">S0022-3913(00)X0091-1</idno><imprint><publisher>ELSEVIER</publisher><date type="published" when="1990"></date><biblScope unit="volume">64</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">6</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="631">631</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="635">635</biblScope></imprint></monogr></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><creation><date>1990</date></creation><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage><abstract xml:lang="en"><p>Precementation refinements of porcelain-fused-to-metal crowns often require reglazing or polishing of the porcelain surface. This study was done to determine whether visual inspection differences exist between glazed and polished porcelain surfaces. Prosthodontists, general dentists, and students (six in each group) rated esthetic properties of 12 porcelain-fused-to-metal crowns. All crowns were initially autoglazed. For phase 1 observations, six crowns were air abraded and polished and six retained their glazed surface. For phase 2 observations, the surface treatments were reversed. At both observations, crowns were rated on 5-point Likert scales for outline form, porosity, smoothness, reflectance, texture, dullness, defects, and general esthetic appearances. Phase 1 polished and glazed crowns had different means for outline form sharpness, porosity, reflectance, dullness, and general esthetic appearance. Phase 2 crowns were different for dullness. Polished and glazed crowns alike were more dull at phase 1 than at phase 2. Glazed crowns were different between phases for reflectance and general esthetic apperance. All reported differences were significant at p <.01. Significant differences occurred among raters with polished and glazed crowns for several variables.</p></abstract></profileDesc><revisionDesc><change when="1990">Published</change></revisionDesc></teiHeader></istex:fulltextTEI><json:item><extension>txt</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>text/plain</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/B72E6E5934AC7E8201B2AA85F19B72B569852A6C/fulltext/txt</uri></json:item></fulltext><metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="Elsevier, elements deleted: tail"><istex:xmlDeclaration>version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"</istex:xmlDeclaration><istex:docType PUBLIC="-//ES//DTD journal article DTD version 4.5.2//EN//XML" URI="art452.dtd" name="istex:docType"></istex:docType><istex:document><converted-article version="4.5.2" docsubtype="fla"><item-info><jid>YMPR</jid><aid>9090284J</aid><ce:pii>0022-3913(90)90284-J</ce:pii><ce:doi>10.1016/0022-3913(90)90284-J</ce:doi><ce:copyright type="unknown" year="1990"></ce:copyright></item-info><head><ce:article-footnote><ce:label>☆</ce:label><ce:note-para>Presented at the American Association for Dental Research meeting, Chicago, Ill.</ce:note-para></ce:article-footnote><ce:title>Clinical discrimination between autoglazed and polished porcelain surfaces</ce:title><ce:author-group><ce:author><ce:given-name>Jane D.</ce:given-name><ce:surname>Brewer</ce:surname><ce:degrees>D.D.S., M.S.</ce:degrees><ce:cross-ref refid="COR1"><ce:sup>∗</ce:sup></ce:cross-ref><ce:cross-ref refid="FN1"><ce:sup>∗</ce:sup></ce:cross-ref></ce:author><ce:author><ce:given-name>Davis A.</ce:given-name><ce:surname>Garlapo</ce:surname><ce:degrees>D.D.S.</ce:degrees><ce:cross-ref refid="FN2"><ce:sup>∗∗</ce:sup></ce:cross-ref></ce:author><ce:author><ce:given-name>Edward A.</ce:given-name><ce:surname>Chipps</ce:surname><ce:degrees>D.D.S.</ce:degrees></ce:author><ce:author><ce:given-name>Lisa A.</ce:given-name><ce:surname>Tedesco</ce:surname><ce:degrees>Ph.D.</ce:degrees></ce:author><ce:affiliation><ce:textfn>State University of New York at Buffalo, School of Dental Medicine, Buffalo, N.Y. USA</ce:textfn></ce:affiliation><ce:correspondence id="COR1"><ce:label>∗</ce:label><ce:text><ce:italic>Reprint requests to:</ce:italic> Dr. Jane D. Brewer School of Dental Medicine Suny at Buffalo Buffalo, NY 14214</ce:text></ce:correspondence><ce:footnote id="FN1"><ce:label>∗</ce:label><ce:note-para>Assistant Professor, Department of Fixed Prosthodontics.</ce:note-para></ce:footnote><ce:footnote id="FN2"><ce:label>∗∗</ce:label><ce:note-para>Professor and Chairman, Department of Fixed Prosthodontics.</ce:note-para></ce:footnote></ce:author-group><ce:abstract><ce:section-title>Abstract</ce:section-title><ce:abstract-sec><ce:simple-para>Precementation refinements of porcelain-fused-to-metal crowns often require reglazing or polishing of the porcelain surface. This study was done to determine whether visual inspection differences exist between glazed and polished porcelain surfaces. Prosthodontists, general dentists, and students (six in each group) rated esthetic properties of 12 porcelain-fused-to-metal crowns. All crowns were initially autoglazed. For phase 1 observations, six crowns were air abraded and polished and six retained their glazed surface. For phase 2 observations, the surface treatments were reversed. At both observations, crowns were rated on 5-point Likert scales for outline form, porosity, smoothness, reflectance, texture, dullness, defects, and general esthetic appearances. Phase 1 polished and glazed crowns had different means for outline form sharpness, porosity, reflectance, dullness, and general esthetic appearance. Phase 2 crowns were different for dullness. Polished and glazed crowns alike were more dull at phase 1 than at phase 2. Glazed crowns were different between phases for reflectance and general esthetic apperance. All reported differences were significant at <ce:italic>p</ce:italic> <.01. Significant differences occurred among raters with polished and glazed crowns for several variables.</ce:simple-para></ce:abstract-sec></ce:abstract></head></converted-article></istex:document></istex:metadataXml><mods version="3.6"><titleInfo><title>Clinical discrimination between autoglazed and polished porcelain surfaces</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="alternative" contentType="CDATA"><title>Clinical discrimination between autoglazed and polished porcelain surfaces</title></titleInfo><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Jane D.</namePart><namePart type="family">Brewer</namePart><namePart type="termsOfAddress">D.D.S., M.S.</namePart><affiliation>State University of New York at Buffalo, School of Dental Medicine, Buffalo, N.Y. USA</affiliation><description>Reprint requests to: Dr. Jane D. Brewer School of Dental Medicine Suny at Buffalo Buffalo, NY 14214</description><description>Assistant Professor, Department of Fixed Prosthodontics.</description><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Davis A.</namePart><namePart type="family">Garlapo</namePart><namePart type="termsOfAddress">D.D.S.</namePart><affiliation>State University of New York at Buffalo, School of Dental Medicine, Buffalo, N.Y. USA</affiliation><description>Professor and Chairman, Department of Fixed Prosthodontics.</description><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Edward A.</namePart><namePart type="family">Chipps</namePart><namePart type="termsOfAddress">D.D.S.</namePart><affiliation>State University of New York at Buffalo, School of Dental Medicine, Buffalo, N.Y. USA</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Lisa A.</namePart><namePart type="family">Tedesco</namePart><namePart type="termsOfAddress">Ph.D.</namePart><affiliation>State University of New York at Buffalo, School of Dental Medicine, Buffalo, N.Y. USA</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource><genre type="research-article" displayLabel="Full-length article" authority="ISTEX" authorityURI="https://content-type.data.istex.fr" valueURI="https://content-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XTP-1JC4F85T-7">research-article</genre><originInfo><publisher>ELSEVIER</publisher><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">1990</dateIssued><copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">1990</copyrightDate></originInfo><language><languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm><languageTerm type="code" authority="rfc3066">en</languageTerm></language><abstract lang="en">Abstract: Precementation refinements of porcelain-fused-to-metal crowns often require reglazing or polishing of the porcelain surface. This study was done to determine whether visual inspection differences exist between glazed and polished porcelain surfaces. Prosthodontists, general dentists, and students (six in each group) rated esthetic properties of 12 porcelain-fused-to-metal crowns. All crowns were initially autoglazed. For phase 1 observations, six crowns were air abraded and polished and six retained their glazed surface. For phase 2 observations, the surface treatments were reversed. At both observations, crowns were rated on 5-point Likert scales for outline form, porosity, smoothness, reflectance, texture, dullness, defects, and general esthetic appearances. Phase 1 polished and glazed crowns had different means for outline form sharpness, porosity, reflectance, dullness, and general esthetic appearance. Phase 2 crowns were different for dullness. Polished and glazed crowns alike were more dull at phase 1 than at phase 2. Glazed crowns were different between phases for reflectance and general esthetic apperance. All reported differences were significant at p <.01. Significant differences occurred among raters with polished and glazed crowns for several variables.</abstract><note>Presented at the American Association for Dental Research meeting, Chicago, Ill.</note><relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="abbreviated"><title>YMPR</title></titleInfo><genre type="journal" authority="ISTEX" authorityURI="https://publication-type.data.istex.fr" valueURI="https://publication-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/JMC-0GLKJH51-B">journal</genre><originInfo><publisher>ELSEVIER</publisher><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">199012</dateIssued></originInfo><identifier type="ISSN">0022-3913</identifier><identifier type="PII">S0022-3913(00)X0091-1</identifier><part><date>199012</date><detail type="volume"><number>64</number><caption>vol.</caption></detail><detail type="issue"><number>6</number><caption>no.</caption></detail><extent unit="issue-pages"><start>A2</start><end>A18</end></extent><extent unit="issue-pages"><start>A21</start><end>A22</end></extent><extent unit="issue-pages"><start>631</start><end>772</end></extent><extent unit="pages"><start>631</start><end>635</end></extent></part></relatedItem><identifier type="istex">B72E6E5934AC7E8201B2AA85F19B72B569852A6C</identifier><identifier type="ark">ark:/67375/6H6-KR500101-M</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1016/0022-3913(90)90284-J</identifier><identifier type="PII">0022-3913(90)90284-J</identifier><recordInfo><recordContentSource authority="ISTEX" authorityURI="https://loaded-corpus.data.istex.fr" valueURI="https://loaded-corpus.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XBH-HKKZVM7B-M">elsevier</recordContentSource></recordInfo></mods><json:item><extension>json</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/json</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/B72E6E5934AC7E8201B2AA85F19B72B569852A6C/metadata/json</uri></json:item></metadata><serie></serie></istex></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Santé/explor/EdenteV2/Data/Istex/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 005B28 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 005B28 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Santé
|area= EdenteV2
|flux= Istex
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:B72E6E5934AC7E8201B2AA85F19B72B569852A6C
|texte= Clinical discrimination between autoglazed and polished porcelain surfaces
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.32. |  |