Article in PDF
How to Cite
Citation Manager
Readers' Comments (0)
Audio Visual Article Statistics
Link
to PUBMED
Print this Article
Send to a Friend
Advertisers
Access Statistics Resources
Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."
Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011
Dr. Shankar P.R.
"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."
Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011 Anuradha
Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.
Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020
Research Protocol
Full Version
The Effect of Pre-Heating on Fracture Toughness in Three Distinct Composite Resin Systems at Two Different Temperatures: A Protocol for an In-vitro Study
Correspondence Address :
Jay Bhopatkar,
103, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Sharad Pawar Dental College and Hospital, DMIHER, Wardha, Maharashtra-442001, India.
E-mail: jbhopatkar0@gmail.com
Introduction: Composite resins are considered the pinnacle of esthetic restorations, but they have their own disadvantages, such as polymerization shrinkage, low fracture toughness, and the formation of microcracks, all of which eventually results in failure of the restoration. Fracture toughness is an important factor for failure. Warming the same composites to certain temperatures will show drastic improvements in the above-mentioned flaws, especially the fracture toughness.
Need for the study: Therefore, the objective of this study is to evaluate and compare the fracture toughness of three different types of composite resin systems at two different pre-heating temperatures. The study aims to provide valuable information to clinicians in choosing the most appropriate restorative material for posterior composite restorations, which can ultimately improve the treatment's success rate and reduce the risk of complications such as secondary caries, postoperative sensitivity and ultimately restoration failure.
Objective: In summary, this study will compare and evaluate the fracture toughness of nanohybrid, micro-hybrid, and bulk-fill composite resins pre-heated at 50 degrees Celsius and 60 degrees Celsius.
Methodology: The methodology involves dividing 72 freshly extracted premolars with intact occlusal anatomy and fully developed apical foramina into three main groups based on three different composites and further dividing each group into two sub-groups based on two different pre-heating temperatures, with 12 teeth in each group. Each tooth will then be prepared with a Class-II Mesio-Occlusal-Distal (MOD) cavity and receive pre-heated composite restoration according to its assigned group and sub-group. The prepared samples will be tested for fracture toughness using a universal testing machine.
Composite pre-warming, Composite resin, Posterior composite restoration
Dental restorative composites have been frequently used to restore posterior teeth throughout the last decade. The most common reasons for failure in direct posterior composite fillings are occlusal wear and secondary caries. However, it has been documented that fracture is also a common reason for its replacement (1).
Because of the loss of marginal ridges and microfractures induced by applied occlusal stresses, mesio-occluso-distal cavity preparation reduces tooth strength significantly (2),(3). Cusps may be forced apart by occlusally applied stresses, and in teeth with broad Class II cavities, cusps can be fractured due to brittle tooth structural fatigue caused by microcrack propagation under repeated stress (4).
Because composites and dentinal adhesives can strengthen the dental structure by bonding to the tooth, they have made a substantial contribution to the fracture resistance of teeth; Furthermore, the choice of adhesive has a major impact on fracture resistance (5). Over the last decade, the clinical performance of modern dental composites has greatly improved to give appropriate strength and resistance to endure mastication loads, as well as reduced polymerization shrinkage and greater cure depth. Nonetheless, in stress-bearing posterior restorations, current dental composites' relatively high brittleness and weak fracture toughness remain a difficulty (1).
A healthy tooth distributes stress differently than a tooth that has been restored (2), despite the fact that the filling procedure and cavity size have a substantial influence on composite bond strength during preparation [6,7]. Furthermore, adhesive restorations have the potential to reinforce compromised tooth structure by effectively transmitting and distributing functional stresses throughout the bonding contact [8-10]. Composite polymerization can induce deformation of the surrounding tooth structure, resulting in microcracks that can lead to fracture (11).
One of the most key attributes of dental materials is fracture resistance. It is governed by the material's resistance to internal flaw-induced fracture propagation. These cracks can result in microscopic fractures of the restoration margins or bulk fractures of the filling (12).
When compared to conventional resins, placing resins that have been preheated to a specific temperature indicates a more promising improvement in physical qualities (13).
Since their invention, resin composite has been the apex of direct cosmetic repairs. However, it comes with its own drawbacks. Polymerization shrinkage commonly causes post-operative discomfort and marginal discoloration. Microleakage and inadequate fracture resistance are the leading causes of resin composite restorative failure [12-13].
However, in recent years many studies have been put forward showing improved physical properties of composite resins following a simple pre-heating procedure (13).
Composite resins that have been pre-heated have a lower viscosity and a higher polymerization efficiency. The monomer conversion rate is increased by heating composite resins before introducing them into the cavity and immediately light-curing them. As a result, the irradiation period may be shortened. Enhanced internal adaptation to cavity walls, improved mechanical qualities, and increased wear resistance may result from increasing the degree of polymerization of composite resins [14,17-19].
The novelty of this study lies in evaluating and comparing the effect of pre-heating on the fracture toughness of three distinct composite resin systems (nanohybrid, micro-hybrid, and bulk-fill) at two different temperatures (50 degrees Celsius and 60 degrees Celsius). While pre-heating composite resins has been previously studied, the specific focus on these three distinct types of composites and the comparison of their fracture toughness at different pre-heating temperatures is a unique aspect of this study. The results of this study could provide valuable information for clinicians in choosing the most appropriate restorative material for posterior composite restorations, ultimately improving the success rate of the treatment.
Aim
The aim of this study is to evaluate and compare the effect of pre-heating on the fracture toughness of three different composite resin systems at two different temperatures (50 degrees Celsius and 60 degrees Celsius).
Objectives
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
A review of literature was conducted, which included studies by Al-Ibraheemi ZA et al., (2021), Abdulhameed OH et al., (2018), and Moosavi H et al., (2012) [14,18,19]. Al-Ibraheemi ZA et al. investigated the effect of various cavity designs on fracture toughness of composite resin and found that the number of missing walls is inversely proportional to fracture toughness of the composite. Abdulhameed OH et al. investigated the effect of pre-heated bulk-fill composite materials on the fracture resistance of maxillary premolars and found that pre-heating significantly improves the fracture toughness of bulk-fill composite resin. Moosavi H et al. investigated the effect of various placement techniques on the fracture toughness of teeth and found that the insertion technique had a substantial impact on the fracture resistance of premolar teeth.
The in-vitro study will be conducted at the Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Sharad Pawar Dental College and Hospital, Sawangi (M), Wardha, Maharashtra, India from February 2023 to June 2024. Ethical clearance was obtained on 15/02/2022 by the Institutional Ethical Committee (IEC) of Datta Meghe Instititute of Medical Sciences, with ethical approval number DMIMS(DU)/ IEC/2022/766. The study will include 72 freshly extracted premolars for orthodontic purposes with complete mature apical foramina.
Inclusion criteria:
• Freshly extracted premolars
• Teeth without fracture
• Teeth without cracks
• Teeth without any previous restoration
Exclusion criteria:
• Carious teeth
• Previously restored teeth
• Teeth with fractures and cracks
PREPARATION OF SAMPLE
Class-II MOD cavities will be prepared on all specimens, with a 2+-0.2mm axial height, 1.5+-0.2 mm gingival width, parallel proximal walls with 3+-0.2 mm buccolingual width, 2+-0.2mm pulpal depth, and occlusal isthmus width one-third of the intercuspal distance. A single operator will restore all the cavities, and four teeth will be cut with a single bur. A single periodontal probe will be used as a guide for improved harmony among all cavities, and no bevels will be performed except for the axiopulpal line angles. A sample size of 12 samples per group will be considered, with a total of 72 teeth. The tooth will be etched with an acid etchant (37% phosphoric acid, Prime Dental, India) for 15 seconds, followed by a water rinse and gentle air drying. Bonding agent (3M ESPE Single Bond Universal Adhesive, USA) will be applied using an applicator tip and light cured for 20 seconds.
The composite syringes will be heated in the composite warmer (Endoking, India) to either 50 or 60 degrees Celsius. To ensure accurate heating, the warmer will be preheated for 45 minutes and checked for temperature every 10 minutes with an infrared non-contact digital thermometer. Once the accurate heating temperature is achieved by the warmer, the respective composite syringe will be loaded into it and allowed to undergo uniform heating for 45 minutes, it will be the minimum required heating time suggested by manufacturer. At the end of the 45-minute warming, the temperature of the composite material will again be rechecked with the help of an infra-red non-contact digital thermometer.
The composite will then be applied in 2 mm increments using a Teflon-coated instrument, with a 20-second time interval between scooping out of the syringe and placing inside the cavity. Each increment will be light-cured for 20 seconds using an oblique approach. A Teflon-coated instrument will be used to occlusally adapt the composite, and a flame-shaped finishing bur will be used to finish it.
Composite will be placed as mentioned in those specimens subjected to the control group. After storage in 37°C distilled water for one month, the specimens will be tested for fracture resistance using a universal testing machine.
Distribution of samples:
The specimens will be divided into six groups at random.
Statistical Analysis
Statistical analysis will be conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, version 27.0 (Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.). The study will be powered at 80% with a 95% confidence interval. Descriptive statistics, including mean, standard deviation, frequency, and percentage, will be computed. ANOVA, followed by Tukey’s post- hoc test, will be applied to compare the fracture resistance of teeth between and within groups. Statistical significance will be set at p<0.05.
DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2023/58551.18054
Date of Submission: Jun 20, 2022
Date of Peer Review: Aug 20, 2022
Date of Acceptance: Apr 18, 2023
Date of Publishing: Jun 01, 2023
AUTHOR DECLARATION:
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? Yes
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? NA
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. NA
PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: Jun 23, 2022
• Manual Googling: Mar 09, 2023
• iThenticate Software: Apr 15, 2023 (9%)
ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin
EMENDATIONS: 6
- Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
- Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
- Academic Search Complete Database
- Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
- Embase
- EBSCOhost
- Google Scholar
- HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
- Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
- Journal seek Database
- Popline (reproductive health literature)
- www.omnimedicalsearch.com