Using tablet technology and instructional videos to enhance preclinical dental laboratory learning.

The purpose of this pilot study was to examine if tablet technology with accompanying instructional videos enhanced the teaching and learning outcomes in a preclinical dental laboratory setting. Two procedures deemed most challenging in Operative Dentistry II were chosen for the development of instructional videos. A random sample of thirty students was chosen to participate in the pilot.

Microtensile dentin adhesive bond strength under different positive pulpal pressures.

Purpose: To measure the in vitro dentin microtensile bond strength of established adhesives under different hydrostatic pulpal pressures.

Methods: After IRB approval, 24 human extracted third molars were randomly distributed into four adhesive treatment groups: Clearfil-SE (self-etch, water-based), One-Step Plus (total-etch, acetone-based), Peak-SE (self-etch, ethanol-based) and PQ1 (total-etch, ethanol-based, Ultradent). Additionally each group was assigned to be restored under 0.

In vitro microtensile bond strength of four adhesives tested at the gingival and pulpal walls of Class II restorations.

Background: The authors compared the microtensile bond strength of teeth restored with four adhesives at the gingival and pulpal cavity walls of Class II resin-based composite restorations.

Methods: Five pairs of extracted third molars received two Class II preparations/restorations in each tooth. The authors randomly assigned each preparation to one of four adhesive groups: Adper Scotchbond Multipurpose Dental Adhesive (SBMP) (3M ESPE, St.

Adhesive analysis of voids in Class II composite resin restorations at the axial and gingival cavity walls restored under in vivo versus in vitro conditions.

Objectives: Adhesive analysis, under the scanning electron microscope of microtensile specimens that failed through the adhesive interface, was conducted to evaluate the amount of voids present at the axial versus gingival cavity walls of class II composite restorations restored under in vivo and in vitro conditions.

Methods: Five patients received class II resin composite restorations, under in vivo and in vitro conditions. A total of 14 premolar teeth yielded 59 (n=59) microtensile adhesive specimens that fractured through the adhesive interface.

An in-vitro microtensile test of Scotchbond Multi-Purpose adhesive applied at different priming times.

Adhesive bonding to dentin can fail if the dentin is too wet during application of the bonding resin. This study compared the in vitro 24-hour microtensile bond strength of teeth restored at four different priming times at the gingival cavity wall of Class II resin composite restorations. After IRB approval, six pairs of extracted third molars (yielding 12 teeth) received a proximal Class II prep/restoration in each tooth.

In vivo versus in vitro microtensile bond strength of axial versus gingival cavity preparation walls in Class II resin-based composite restorations.

Background: Gingival margins in Class II composite restorations are a site of frequent failure. The purpose of the authors' study was to compare the microtensile dentin bond strength of gingival and axial restored cavity preparation walls of Class II composite restorations under in vivo and in vitro conditions.

Methods: After obtaining informed consent, the authors placed Class II resin-based composite restorations in 14 premolar teeth from five patients, under in vivo or in vitro conditions.