Comparative Evaluation of Ozone Water and Glutaraldehyde on Surface Detail Reproduction of Vinyl Polyether Silicone Impression Materials at Different Time Intervals

ABSTRACT Objective: The study aims to evaluate the impact of chemical disinfection using ozone water and glutaraldehyde on the surface detail reproduction (SDR) of vinyl polyether silicone (VPES) impression material at different time intervals. Methodology: VPES impressions were categorized into lig...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of pharmacy & bioallied science 2024-12, Vol.16 (Suppl 4), p.S3837-S3839
Main Authors: Shankar, Kriti, Dandekeri, Savita, Shetty, Rajesh, Fernandes, Kevin, Shetty, Sanath Kumar, Ragher, Mallikarjuna
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Air pollution
Comparative analysis
Crosslinked polymers
Disinfectants
Disinfection
Disinfection & disinfectants
Environmental aspects
Glutaraldehyde
Infection control
Light
Ozone
Reproduction
Silicones
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:ABSTRACT Objective: The study aims to evaluate the impact of chemical disinfection using ozone water and glutaraldehyde on the surface detail reproduction (SDR) of vinyl polyether silicone (VPES) impression material at different time intervals. Methodology: VPES impressions were categorized into light-body and heavy-body groups and further divided based on the disinfectant used (ozone water or glutaraldehyde) and the time interval of disinfection (T1: 15 minutes and T2: 24 hours). A total of 80 impressions (40 light-body and 40 heavy-body) were prepared and subjected to the respective disinfection protocols. The SDR was evaluated using a standard scoring system to determine the quality of detail reproduction. Results: Ozone water demonstrated superior performance in preserving surface detail compared to glutaraldehyde at both T1 and T2 for both light-body VPES and heavy-body VPES. Light-body VPES showed better SDR scores compared to heavy-body VPES across all conditions. Specifically, for light-body VPES, the mean SDR scores at T1 were significantly better for ozone water compared to glutaraldehyde (mean scores: 1.00 vs. 1.27, P = 0.046). For heavy-body VPES, ozone water also performed better at T1 compared to glutaraldehyde (mean scores: 1.27 vs. 1.67, P = 0.034). Disinfection at T1 resulted in better SDR scores compared to T2 for both light-body VPES and heavy-body VPES. Conclusion: Ozone water is a more effective disinfectant than glutaraldehyde for preserving the surface detail of VPES impressions, especially when disinfection is conducted for a shorter duration (15 minutes). Keywords: Dental impressions, disinfection, glutaraldehyde, heavy-body VPES, light-body VPES, ozone water, surface detail reproduction, vinyl polyether silicone
ISSN:0976-4879
0975-7406
DOI:10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_1318_24