Araştırma Çıktıları | TR-Dizin | WoS | Scopus | PubMed

Permanent URI for this communityhttps://hdl.handle.net/11727/4806

Browse

Filters

2019 - 201912020 - 20222

Settings

Author: search.filters.author.Arhun, Neslihansearch.filters.applied.f.rights: search.filters.rights.info:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccess

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    The Practices of Treating Deep Carious Lesions Compared with the Dental Curriculum in Turkish Dentistry
    (2022) Kerimova, Leyla; Karabulut, Erdem; Yamanel, Kivanc; Arhun, Neslihan
    Objective: The aim of this cross-sectional study is to investigate Turkish dentists' opinions and preferences regarding the management of deep carious lesions and compare them with modern dental education concepts as provided by dental schools. Methods: Questionnaire 1 and Questionnaire 2 were sent separately to dental practitioners via the Turkish Dental Association and to university department heads of restorative dentistry. The data obtained were analyzed using chi-square tests and one-way ANOVA tests (p < 0.05). Results: Regarding Questionnaire 1, most of the dentists (89.3%) responded that caries lesions should be removed completely up to the hard cut-off condition of the cavity floor. There was a statistically significant difference between female and male dentists' preferences on less invasive treatment (p < 0.05). Female dentists prefer less invasive treatment compared with male dentists (p = 0.002). Relatively older dentists (mean age = 41.8) are more inclined towards complete caries removal even if pulp exposure is likely (p = 0.040). The results of Questionnaire 2 reveal that there is no association between the time spans of education at dental schools and their caries removal approach curriculum (p > 0.05). Most department heads of restorative dentistry prefer to apply complete caries removal (78.5%, n = 51). Conclusion: Despite today's curriculum encouraging less invasive caries removal techniques, most dentists prefer more invasive treatment options. Continuous education of contemporary dentistry could update these clinical treatment attitudes of dentists and improve their clinical practice.
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SKELETAL AND MANDIBULAR/ALVEOLAR BONE QUALITY AFTER SOLID ORGAN TRANSPLANTATION
    (2020) Oduncuoglu, Bahar; Gulsahi, Ayse; Arhun, Neslihan; Colak, Turan; Haberal, Mehmet A.
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    The shear bond strength of repaired high-viscosity bulk-fill resin composites with different adhesive systems and resin composite types
    (2019) Oglakci, Burcu; Arhun, Neslihan; 0000-0002-6587-5997
    This study compared the effect of different adhesive systems and composite resins on the shear bond strength (SBS) of repaired high-viscosity bulk-fill composites(Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill) and investigated failure modes. One hundred twenty cylindrical bulk-fill composite blocks (diameter 5 mm) were fabricated and thermocycled for 5000 cycles (5-55 degrees C). Specimens were roughened by diamond bur and divided into 8 groups (n = 15). Bulk-fill blocks were repaired with the same material or nanohybrid composite resin(Tetric EvoCeram Nanohybrid) (diameter 3 mm) using different adhesive systems:Tetric N-Bond Universal (TSE);37% phosphoric acid etching + Tetric N-Bond Universal (TER); Clearfil SE Bond (CSE); 37% phosphoric acid etching + AdperSingle Bond 2(SB). After repair procedures, all specimens were thermocycled again. The shear bond strengths were measured for all specimens using a universal test machine (crosshead speed of 1 mm/min). Cohesive strengths of bulk-fill composites were measured and described as control group. Debonded surfaces were observed with a stereomicroscope under 10x magnification to determine mode of failure. The SBS data of all groups was statistically analyzed by two-way ANOVA and Bonferroni correction test (p < 0.05). The specimens repaired with bulk-fill composites showed significantly higher SBS values (25.86 +/- 5.74, 27.05 +/- 4.93, 24.49 +/- 6.95MPa) than those with nanohybrid composites (20.41 +/- 3.70, 22.08 +/- 6.37, 18.74 +/- 6.40 MPa) for TER,CSE,SB, respectively (p < 0.05). There were no significant differences in SBS according to the type of adhesive systems for both repair materials (p > 0.05). The predominant mode of failure was a mixed type in the restorative material except for the ones repaired with nanohybrid composites using AdperSingle Bond 2. High-viscosity bulk-fill composites could be successfully repaired with the same materials. SBS of repaired bulk-fill composites reached cohesive strength for all tested groups.