International Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 15 , ISSUE 4 ( July-August, 2022 ) > List of Articles


Comparative Evaluation of Compressive Strength and Diametral Tensile Strength of Conventional Glass Ionomer Cement and a Glass Hybrid Glass Ionomer Cement

Sanket Kunte, Swarali Bharat Shah, Smita Patil, Preetam Shah, Alok Patel, Shweta Chaudhary

Keywords : Compressive strength, Diametral tensile strength, Glass hybrid, Glass ionomer cement

Citation Information : Kunte S, Shah SB, Patil S, Shah P, Patel A, Chaudhary S. Comparative Evaluation of Compressive Strength and Diametral Tensile Strength of Conventional Glass Ionomer Cement and a Glass Hybrid Glass Ionomer Cement. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2022; 15 (4):398-401.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-2407

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 17-12-2022

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2022; The Author(s).


Aim: The aim of this study is to compare and evaluate compressive strength (CS) and diametral tensile strength (DTS) of a conventional glass ionomer cement (GIC) and a glass hybrid GIC. Materials and methods: Five samples each were prepared of GC Fuji IX and EQUIA Forte cements for CS testing and five samples of each material for tensile strength testing. Specimens were subjected to a universal testing machine. Comparison of CS and DTS among two study groups was made using an independent t-test for each. Level of significance was set at p ≤ 0.05. Results: Both test values were on the higher side for EQUIA Forte cement as compared to conventional GIC (p ≥ 0.05). However, the differences in values were not statistically significant. Conclusion: EQUIA Forte can serve as an alternative to conventional GIC in stress-bearing primary teeth areas. Considering several factors like cost-effectiveness, surface to be restored, moisture contamination, and time considerations, the material of choice can be tailored to one's needs. Clinical significance: EQUIA Forte can serve as a viable alternative to conventional GIC because of its improved qualities.

PDF Share
  1. Barretto E, Aswin S, Shetty S, et al. Comparative evaluation of compressive strength of Ketac Molar, Fuji IX and Equia Forte. Indian J Public Health Res Dev 2018;9(5):228. DOI: 10.5958/0976-5506.2018.00444.8
  2. Chun KJ, Lee JY. Comparative study of mechanical properties of dental restorative materials and dental hard tissues in compressive loads. J Dent Biomech 2014;5:1758736014555246. DOI: 10.1177/1758736014555246
  3. Kutuk ZB, Ozturk C, Cakir FY, et al. Mechanical performance of a newly developed glass hybrid restorative in the restoration of large MO Class 2 cavities. Niger J Clin Pract 2019;22(6):833–841. DOI: 10.4103/njcp.njcp_628_18
  4. Busanello L, Telles M, Júnior WG, et al. Compressive strength of glass ionomer cements used for atraumatic restorative treatment. Rev odontociênc 2009;24(3):295–298.
  5. Wilson AD, Kent BE, Mesley RJ, et al. Formation of dental silicate cement. Nature 1970;225:272–273. DOI: 10.1038/225272a0
  6. Wilson AD, Kent BE. A new translucent cement for dentistry. The glass ionomer cement. Br Dent J 1972;132(4):133–135. DOI: 10.1038/sj.bdj.4802810
  7. Bresciani E, Barata TDJE, Fagundes TC, et al. Compressive and diametral tensile strength of glass ionomer cements. J Appl Oral Sci 2004;12(4):344–348. DOI: 10.1590/S1678-77572004000400017
  8. Rekha CV, Varma B, Jayanthi. Comparative evaluation of tensile bond strength and microleakage of conventional glass ionomer cement, resin modified glass ionomer cement and compomer: an in vitro study. Contemp Clin Dent 2012;3(3):282–287. DOI: 10.4103/0976-237X.103619
  9. Xie D, Brantley WA, Culbertson BM, et al. Mechanical properties and microstructures of glass-ionomer cements. Dent Mater 2000;16(2):129–138. DOI: 10.1016/s0109-5641(99)00093-7
  10. Darvell BW. Mechanical testing. In: Materials Science for Dentistry. 6th ed. Hong Kong: University of Hong Kong; 2000. p. 1–18.
  11. McLean JW. Glass-ionomer cement. Br Dent J 1988;164(9):293–300. DOI: 10.1038/sj.bdj.4806434
  12. Poornima P, Koley P, Kenchappa M, et al. Comparative evaluation of compressive strength and surface microhardness of EQUIA Forte, resin-modified glass-ionomer cement with conventional glass-ionomer cement. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2019;37(3):265–270. DOI: 10.4103/JISPPD.JISPPD_342_18
  13. Garcia-Contreras R, Scougall-Vilchis RJ, Contreras-Bulnes R, et al. Mechanical, antibacterial and bond strength properties of nano-titanium-enriched glass ionomer cement. J Appl Oral Sci 2015;23(3):321–328. DOI: 10.1590/1678-775720140496
  15. EQUIA Forte. Bulk Fill, fluoride releasing, glass hybrid restorative system. GC America: EQUIA Forte. Available from:
  16. Introducing the restorative innovation of glass hybrid technology: a comprehensive guide to Equia Forte.
  17. Wang L, D'Alpino PH, Lopes LG, et al. Mechanical properties of dental restorative materials: relative contribution of laboratory tests. J Appl Oral Sci 2003;11(3):162–167. DOI: 10.1590/s1678-77572003000300002
  18. Craig RG. Mechanical properties. In: Restorative Dental Materials. 10th ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 1997. p. 56–103.
  19. Yap AUJ, Cheang PHN, Chay PL. Mechanical properties of two restorative reinforced glass-ionomer cements. J Oral Rehabil 2002;29(7):682–688. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2842.2002.00908.x
  20. Mallmann A, Ataíde JCO, Amoedo R, et al. Compressive strength of glass ionomer cements using different specimen dimensions. Braz Oral Res 2007;21(3):204–208. DOI: 10.1590/s1806-83242007000300003
  21. Phillip's Science of Dental Materials, 12th ed., Chapter 4. Mechanical Properties of Dental Materials. p. 49.
  22. Jayanthi N, Vinod V. Comparative evaluation of compressive strength and flexural strength of conventional core materials with nanohybrid composite resin core material an in vitro study. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 2013;13(3):281–289. DOI: 10.1007/s13191-012-0236-4
  23. British Standards Institution. British Standards Specification for Dental Glass Ionomer Cement BS 6039; 1981. 4.
  24. Yap AUJ, Pek YS, Cheang P. Physico-mechanical properties of a fast-set highly viscous GIC restorative. J Oral Rehabil 2003;30(1):1–8. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2842.2003.01006.x
  25. Moshaverinia M, Navas A, Jahedmanesh N, et al. Comparative evaluation of the physical properties of a reinforced glass ionomer dental restorative material. J Prosthet Dent 2019;122(2):154–159. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.03.012
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.