2020 Volume 8 Issue 1

 

 

The Evaluation of Two Different Methods of Acrylic Resin Polymerization

Edit Xhajanka*, Neada Hysenaj, Merita Bardhoshi, Koço Gjilo

Faculty of Dental Medicine, University Dental Clinic, Department of Prosthodontics, Tirana, Albania.

 

 

ABSTRACT

Background. During the polymerization and processing procedures of heat-polymerization, polymethyl methacrylate shrinkage of acrylic resin has been noticed. The purpose of the study was to compare two methods of polymerization of acrylic resin: compression molding and injection molding technique.

Materials and methods. 167 patients who needed removable denture treatment were examined. Among them, the patients who met the inclusion criteria were selected to be part of our study. Two types of complete dentures were constructed: The first group of dentures was constructed with the compression molding technique, while the second group of dentures was constructed with the injection molding technique. The first group of dentures was delivered to the patients. They were left for a month, a period during which we made follow up visits each week. The same procedure was followed for the second group. At the end of the first month, the patients fulfilled a questionnaire, assessing OHRQoL. The answers were also clinically evaluated.

Results. The data were collected and the statistical evaluation of the data was accomplished. Based on the results, it was observed that there was a statistically significant improvement in OHRQoL regarding the dentures constructed with injection molding technique.

Conclusion. Within the limitation of this study, it can be concluded that the resin injection molding technique showed greater advantages compared to the compression molding technique‎.

Key words: Compression molding, injection molding, OHRQoL.

 

 

 

Introduction

 

Acrylic resin polymers are the materials of choice for denture base construction. They have many advantages such as good physical qualities, aesthetics, low toxicity1-3. The process of resin compression molding is the traditional way of constructing dentures4-6. During this procedure, it has been observed resin shrinkage1. Different materials have been used to reduce the dimensional change of the denture base during compression molding such as glass fibers, metal elements, etc.7. Different techniques have been used in the attempt of reducing resin shrinkage. One of these is the injection molding method. It was first presented in 1942, by Pryor8, 9. Nowadays there are several methods and materials used for the injection molding technique10, 11. This procedure has always attracted the researchers' attention, based on the data, a reduction of acrylic resin shrinkage has been documented12. The purpose of our study was to compare the impact of two different processing techniques of complete dentures on the life quality of the patients.

Material and Methods

167 patients who needed removable denture treatment were examined. Among them, 89 patients were selected who needed complete denture treatment. Among them, 53 patients accepted to be part of our study (Chart Nr.1).

Chart Nr. 1

Two types of complete dentures were constructed: The first group of dentures was constructed with the compression molding technique, while the second group of dentures with the injection molding technique using vertex castavaria. The first impression was made with alginate. A sectional border molding with Kerry wax was done. The final impression was made with Zinc Oxide Eugenol. The centric record was done based on the usual steps. Teeth set up was done based on the bilateral balanced occlusion concept. Anatomic teeth were selected for the trial stage. The try-in stage was realized. All these procedures were realized by the same clinician. The same steps, materials, and techniques were followed for both groups. In the first group, SR Triplex Hot resin was used for the compression molding technique. Polymer and monomer were mixed based on the manufactures instructions. For the construction of the second group of dentures, VertexTM ThermoJect 22 was used to inject the resin.

The first group of dentures was delivered to the patients. They were left for a month, a period during which we made follow up visits each week. The same procedure was followed for the second group. At the end of the first month, the patients fulfilled a questionnaire about the impact of the dentures in their quality of life. The selected patients were informed about the study and written consent was taken.

Results

The data was collected and the evaluation of the data was accomplished. All patients fulfilled two questionnaires: one for the conventional technique of dentures, and the second for the injection molding technique. Based on the results, there was a significant difference between the group of the dentures processed with the injection molding and compression molding technique. In the injection molding group, over 85 % of the patients did not report any problem regarding Functional limitation, Physical disability, Physical pain, Psychological discomfort, Psychological disability, Social disability, and Handicap. In all the parameters, the values of the patients who had completed dentures with injection molding technique were statistically higher compared to the values of the patients who had complete dentures constructed with the compression molding technique. The results are shown in Table 1 and Table 2.

Discussion

In this study, we compared the conventional group of dentures with the dentures constructed with injection molding technique based on the OHRQoL. The conventional way is most used and it often serves as an etalon of comparison with other methods. The injection molding technique is characterized by injecting resin lay after lay, with heat under pressure. The space, which is created from the resin shrinkage during polymerization is compensated by the new resin, which is injected under pressure by compensating so dimensional change12-14. The Spanish validated version of the OHIP-14 questionnaire was used to assess the patients' quality of life.15 The full OHIP consists of 49 parameters that cover seven parameters: functional limitation, physical pain, psychologic discomfort, physical disability, psychologic disability, social disability, and handicap. Locker and Allen16 studied a version of 14 of the first 49 parameters, which can be practiced in any case where a simpler version is applicable. Answers were derived from the Likert sample, with 5 point answers from “never” (1) to “always” (5).17 Several studies have concluded about the adva95ntages of injection molding technique compared to the traditional methods18-22. Most of them were used as a comparison parameter to the dimensional change of the denture base, where it demonstrated higher dimensional stability of the dentures constructed with the injection molding technique. In contrast with the previous studies, Garfunkel et al.23 concluded that there was no significant advantage between this method and the traditional one. However, this study was published in 1952 before the introduction of newer injection molding systems. Anyway, no study was done in order to compare the injection molding technique and compression molding technique, based on the Oral Health-Related Quality of Life questionnaire.

Conclusion

Within the limitation of this study, we can conclude that the injection molding technique offers greater advantages compared to the compression molding technique. Future research is necessary regarding all parameters of these dentures, compared to CAD-CAM dentures.

 

 

Table 1: The results using OHIP-14 about the dentures constructed with the injection molding method

Results of Quality of Life Assessment Using the OHiP-14 Questionnaire (% of patients)

about the dentures constructed with the injection molding technique

Items

Never

Rarely

Occasionally

Frequently

Always

Problems with pronunciation

88.6

11.4

-

-

-

Bad sense of taste

94.3

5.7

-

-

-

Pain

92.4

7.6

-

-

-

Discomfort when eating

84.9

15.1

-

-

-

Concern for the mouth

86.7

13.3

-

-

-

Self-consciousness due to oral problems

88.6

11.4

-

-

-

Dissatisfaction with food intake

92.4

7.6

-

-

-

Interruption of meals

88.6

11.4

-

-

-

Difficulty relaxing due to denture problems

84.9

15.1

-

-

-

Embarrassment arising from oral problems

94.3

5.7

-

-

-

Irritability

86.7

13.3

-

-

-

Problems at work due to denture problems

94.3

5.7

-

-

-

Found life less satisfying due to denture problems

84.9

15.1

-

-

-

Complete inability to function

92.4

7.6

-

-

-

 

Table 2:The results using OHIP-14 about the dentures constructed with compression molding method

Results of Quality of Life Assessment Using the OHiP-14 Questionnaire (% of patients)

about dentures constructed with the compression molding technique.

Items

Never

Rarely

Occasionally

Frequently

Always

Problems with pronunciation

52.8

24.5

22.6

-

-

Bad sense of taste

71.6

22.6

5.6

-

-

Pain

56.6

32.0

11.3

-

-

Discomfort when eating

37.7

37.7

24.6

-

-

Concern for the mouth

62.2

15.0

22.6

-

-

Self-consciousness due to oral problems

88.6

11.4

-

-

-

Dissatisfaction with food intake

54.7

22.6

22.6

-

-

Interruption of meals

52.8

24.5

22.6

-

-

Difficulty relaxing due to denture problems

66.0

43.3

-

-

-

Embarrassment arising from oral problems

56.6

11.3

32

-

-

Irritability

71.6

5.6

22.6

-

-

Problems at work due to denture problems

62.2

22.6

15

-

-

Found life less satisfying due to denture problems

56.6

32.0

11.3

-

-

Complete inability to function

54.7

22.6

22.6

-

-

 

 

Conflict of interest:

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

References

 

  1. Takamata T, Setcos JC. Resin denture bases: review of accuracy and methods of polymerization. Int J Prosthodont. 1989; 2: 555-62.
  2. Mahfooz AM, Alammari MR. The Use of Fourier Transform Infra-Red (FTIR) Spectroscopic Analysis and Cell Viability Assay to Assess Pre-polymerized CAD\CAM Acrylic Resin Denture Base Materials. Int. J. Pharm. Res. Allied Sci. 2018 Apr 1;7(2):111-8.
  3. Shinawi LA. The effect of various denture cleansers on the colour stability of different denture base resins. Int. J. Pharm. Res. Allied Sci. 2017 Apr 1;6(2)238-46.
  4. Zarb GA, Bolender CL, Carlsson GE. Boucher’s prosthodontic treatment for edentulous patients, 11th ed. St Louis: Mosby; 1997. p. 337-42.
  5. Yen YY, Lee HE, Wu YM, Lan SJ. Impact of removable dentures on oral health-related quality of life among elderly adults in Taiwan. BMC Oral Health. 2015;15:1. doi: 10.1186/1472-6831-15-1.
  6. Ramezani M, Moradi P. A Comparative Analysis of Shear Bond Strength of Composite and Acrylic Teeth to Heat-Cured Acrylic Resin by Difference Preparation Methods. Pharmacophores. 2017 Jan 1;8(4):27-34.
  7. Mustapha R, Zohra SF, Seghier OK, Boumediene B, Soumia B, Masika B, Salim B. Elaboration of a Composite Material (PMAA / TSOH) Based on Poly (Methacrylic Acid) (PMAA) and Chemically Modified Timber Sawdust (TSOH) for the Removal of Methylene Blue in Aqueous Solution. World Journal of Environmental Biosciences. 2019;8(1):16-24.
  8. Pryor WJ. Injection molding of plastics for dentures. J Am Dent Assoc. 1942; 29: 1400-8
  9. Grunewald et al. Dimensional Changes of Acrylic Resin Denture Bases: Conventional Versus Injection-Molding Technique. J Dent (Tehran).2014;11(4):398-405.
  10. Garfunkel E. Evaluation of dimensional changes in complete dentures processed by injection-pressing and the pack-and press technique. J Prosthet Dent; 1983; 50: 757-61.
  11. Anderson GC, Schulte JK, Arnold TG. Dimensional stability of injection and conventional processing denture base acrylic resin. J Prosthet Dent. 1988; 60: 394-8.
  12. Nagakura M, Tanimoto Y, Nishiyama N. Effect of fiber content on flexural properties of glass fiber-reinforced polyamide-6 prepared by injection molding. Dent Mater J. 2017;36:1–7. [PubMed] [Google Scholar].
  13. Wada J, Fueki K, Yatabe M, Takahashi H, Wakabayashi N. A comparison of the fitting accuracy of thermoplastic denture base resins used in non-metal clasp dentures to a conventional heat-cured acrylic resin. Acta Odontol Scand. 2015;73:33–7. [PubMed] [Google Scholar].
  14. Schwindling FS, Stober T. A comparison of two digital techniques for the fabrication of complete removable dental prostheses: A pilot clinical study. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;116:756–63. [PubMed] [Google Scholar].
  15. Montero-Martín J, Bravo-Pérez M, Albaladejo-Martínez A, Hernán-dez-Martín LA, Rosel-Gallardo EM. Validation of the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14sp) for adults in Spain. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2009 ;14:e44–50.
  16. Locker D, Allen PF. Developing short-form measures of oral health-related quality of life. J Public Health Dent. 2002; 62:13–20.
  17. Brennan M, Houston F, O'Sullivan M, O'Connell B. Patient satisfaction and oral health-related quality of life outcomes of implant overdentures and fixed complete dentures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2010;25:791–800.
  18. V. Krishna, Chintalacheruvu, R. Uttukuli Balraj, S. Pachall. Evaluation of Three Different Processing Techniques in the Fabrication of Complete Dentures. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent. 7(Suppl 1): 2017; S18–S23.
  19. Peñarrocha M, Carrillo C, Boronat A, Balaguer J. Palatal Positioning of Implants in Severely Resorbed Edentulous Maxillae. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2009; 24(3):527-33.
  20. Anderson GC, Schulte JK, Arnold TG . Dimensional stability of injection and conventional processing of denture base acrylic resin. J Prosthet Dent. 1988; 60:394–8. [PubMed] [Google Scholar].
  21. Salim S, Sadamori S, Hamada T. The dimensional accuracy of rectangular acrylic resin specimens cured by three denture base processing methods. J Prosthet Dent. 1992; 67:879–81. [PubMed] [Google Scholar].
  22. Strohaver RA. Comparison of changes in vertical dimension between compression and injection molded complete dentures. J Prosthet Dent. 1989; 62:716–8. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Garfunkel E. Evaluation of dimensional changes in complete dentures processed by injection-pressing and the pack-and-press technique. J Prosthet Dent. 1983; 50:757–61. [PubMed] [Google Scholar].

 

Corresponding Author

 

Edit Xhajanka

Faculty of Dental Medicine, University Dental Clinic, Department of Prosthodontics, Tirana, Albania.

 

E-mail: neadah @yahoo.com,                                                                                                         edit.xhajanka @ umed.edu.al                              

 

Issue 3 Volume 8 - 2020
Call for Papers