KEKASARAN PERMUKAAN RESIN KOMPOSIT METAKRILAT DENGAN RESIN KOMPOSIT SILORANE YANG DIRENDAM DALAM SALIVA DENGAN pH YANG BERBEDA

• Main Authors: , ERDANANDA NINDYA W, , drg. Diatri Nari Ratih, M.S., Sp.KG., Ph.D.
• Format: Theses and Dissertations NonPeerReviewed
• Published: [Yogyakarta] : Universitas Gadjah Mada 2013
• Subjects: ETD
• Online Access: https://repository.ugm.ac.id/121791/; http://etd.ugm.ac.id/index.php?mod=penelitian_detail&sub=PenelitianDetail&act=view&typ=html&buku_id=61889
• Institution: Universitas Gadjah Mada

Surface roughness of a restoration is affected by oral conditions, such as saliva.. Saliva pH of each individual can be categorized as acid, neutral and alkaline. The purpose of this study was to compare the surface roughness of methacrylate and silorane resin composite, which was soaked in saliva with different pH of 5.6 and 6.8. Twenty silorane resin composite and 20 methacrylate resin composite, which were applied within cylindrical mold ( diameter: 5 mm, height: 2 mm ) were divided into four groups of 10 each, then all the specimens were immersed in saliva for 14 days. The first group of 10 cylindrical silorane soaked in saliva with ph 5.6, the second group of 10 cylindrical silorane soaked in saliva with pH 6.8, the third group of 10 cylindrical methacrylate soaked in saliva with pH 5.6, the fourth groups of 10 cylindrical methacrylate soaked in saliva with pH 6.8. All specimens were then thermocycled using a water bath with temperature of 4 0C and 60 0C. Afterwards, surface roughness (Ra) of each specimen was measured using surface roughness measuring instrument (Surfcom 120A). Data was then analyzed using two way ANOVA with 95% confidence level (α=0,05). The results showed that methacrylate resin composite, which was soaked in saliva of pH 5.6 was the highest in surface roughness (0.84 ± 0.15 micron), while silorane resin composite, which was soaked in saliva of pH 6.8 was the lowest in surface roughness (0.22 ± 0.15 micron). Two way ANOVA analysis showed that the type of resin composite had a significant influence on the surface roughness (p< 0.05), whereas a pH of saliva had no significant influence on the surface roughness (p> 0,05). It can be concluded that the differences occurred on the surface roughness between silorane and methacrylate resin composite. Methacrylate resin composite had a greater surface roughness than silorane at either pH of 5.6 or 6.8. In addition, pH of saliva had no influence on the surface roughness.