• Journal of dental hygiene science
• /
• v.9 no.1
• /
• pp.121-127
• /
• 2009

A comparative analysis was conducted through this study on tooth brushing and a use of auxiliary oral hygiene devices for oral hygiene for 287 S Health College students some of whom major dental hygiene and some of whom don't relate to the department, and then has drawn out the results as below. 1. Relating to the frequency of tooth brushing, 2-3 times a day was the utmost case in both departments(p < 0.05). 2. In use of toothbrush bristle, the students of dental hygiene department used medium bristle(51.2%), while the student of other department used soft bristle(51.5%)(p > 0.05). 3. In the term of tooth brush used, 2~5 months was the utmost case in both departments(p > 0.05). 4. In tooth- brushing method, all the student of both departments said they knew how to do it(p > 0.05). 5. In the acquisition of tooth brushing methods, the students of dental hygiene acquired it from dentistry 44.4%, and the students of other department from TV or Radio 47.5% (p > 0.05)which was a quite high rate. 6. In reference to recognition level on auxiliary oral hygiene devices, dental hygiene students said Yes 79.8%, and the other side students said No 63.9%(p < 0.05). In reuse of auxiliary oral hygiene devices, a great number of students of both departments said No (p < 0.05). 8. In reference to the chance to use auxiliary oral hygiene devices, 58.1% of dental hygiene students chose them with their own judgement, and 37.8% of other department students recommended by dentist's offices(p < 0.05). 9. Relating to the reason for not using auxiliary oral hygiene devices, 38.9% of the dental hygiene students said it's bothersome, and 56.7% of the other department students said they didn't know about these things(p < 0.05). 10. In the recognition level of dental floss, in knowing the way to use it, whether or not of using it, the students of both department showed a significant difference (p < 0.05). 11. In the recognition level of floss holder and the yes or not of using it, there was an insignificant difference(p > 0.05), while in understanding of it, there was a significant difference(p < 0.05). 12. Relating to the recognition level of electric tooth brush, yes or no of using it, there wasn't a significant difference(p > 0.05). 13. In the cognition level of rubber stimulator, yes or no of using it, there wasn't much difference, while in understanding to use it, there was a significant difference(p < 0.05). 14. In the understanding level of water pik, yes or not of using it, there wasn't a great deal of difference(p < 0.05), but in inquiry of whether or not of using it, there was no difference (p > 0.05), 15. In the understanding level of tongue scraper, whether or not of using it, there wasn't much difference(p > 0.05), but in understanding to use it, there was a great deal of difference(p < 0.05). 16. In the recognition of garglin, understanding of it, and whether or not of using it, the two departments didn't show a significant difference(p < 0.05).

• Journal of the korean academy of Pediatric Dentistry
• /
• v.28 no.4
• /
• pp.633-637
• /
• 2001

Local anesthesia procedure in pediatric dentistry using needle-tipped syringes is stressful and painful for the child patients The Syrijet Mark II (Mizzy Inc. USA) is a jet injection instrument, which uses high pressure to propel fluids into soft tissue without the use of a hollow neeldle, so it seems to be able to reduce the injection phobia of the child patients. The authors compared the Syrijet with the conventional syringe by assessing the pain level after local anesthetic procedures using CAS(color analogue scale) which was developed from VAS(visual analogue scale). The result showed that the pain was reduced by the use of syrijet. The advantages of syrijet were no use of neeldes, the reuse of the anesthetic cartridge, and the safety to nerves and vessels. The disadvantages were the large size, the high price, and the need of skill to use.

• Journal of Technologic Dentistry
• /
• v.18 no.1
• /
• pp.15-25
• /
• 1996

This study is to measure and compare the hardness and tensile strength of each time after we recast seven times continually only with and metal alloy Chromium-Cobalt alloy used in the production of partial denture frame work. The result of the experiment were as follow; 1) The result of the hardness measurement The result of the first casting was $490.48{\pm}38.38$ and that of the second recasting was $455.18{\pm}35.61$ and form the third recasting. the result were $518.38{\pm}37.68$ and over. The change of the hardness difference between each recasting was as follow; The hardness difference between the first casting and the second recasting was $35.25{\pm}31.93$ and that between the second recasting and the third recasting was $63.20{\pm}54.02$. There was a statistically significant difference(P<0.01) in the above hardness, however, there was little difference on the whole. And after the third recasting, the hardness grew high a little bit. That is why low-melting metals such as Cr, Mn, Cu of alloy ingredient was evaporated or there was an effect of changes in metal crystal structure, I suppose. 2) The result of the tensile strength measurement. There was a statistically significant difference(P<0.01) between the first casting and the second, the fourth recasting, however. there was little difference in general.

• Journal of Technologic Dentistry
• /
• v.43 no.4
• /
• pp.175-180
• /
• 2021

Purpose: This study investigates the effect of repeated use of lithium disilicate glass-ceramics on color stability. Methods: In this study, 2 types of lithium disilicate glass-ceramics were used and they were divided into 4 groups after 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th heat pressing. The L^*, a^*, and b^* values of all specimens were measured using the VITA Easyshade Advance 4.0. These values was used to determine the ∆E value and transparency. IBM SPSS Statistics ver. 24.0, a statistical significance level of 0.05 and one-way ANOVA were used for all data. Results: In all groups, the L^* and b^* values were the lowest in the specimens subjected to the 4th heat pressing and the corresponding a^* value was the highest. All specimens showed ∆E values of ≤3.3, indicating color changes that were not visible with the naked eye, and the color difference increased with the number of repeated heat pressing. The transparency of all specimens decreased as the number of repeated uses increased. Conclusion: According to the number of repeated heat pressing, the color difference of Rosetta SP (HASSBIO) was larger than that of IPS e.max Press (Ivoclar Vivadent), but it was clinically acceptable in all groups. Moreover, transparency decreased as the number of heat presses increased in all groups. According to the above findings, the lithium disilicate glass-ceramic has high color stability due to repeated heat pressing, implying that it can be used in clinical settings regularly.