OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate shear bond strength (SBS) and failure site location of brackets bonded to enamel with or without desensitizer application. METHODS: Sixty-six freshly extracted human premolar teeth were randomly divided into 3 groups of 22. Group 1 served as the control. Desensitizer was applied to the remaining teeth at two time intervals (Group 2, bonded immediately after Pro-Relief(TM) (Colgate-Palmolive Co., New York, NY, USA) application and Group 3, bonded 30 days after Pro-Relief(TM) application with the teeth stored in artificial saliva during the 30 days). Orthodontic brackets were bonded with a light cure composite resin and cured with a halogen light. After bonding, the SBS of the brackets was tested using a universal testing device. Adhesive remnant index (ARI) scores were determined after the brackets failed. Data were analyzed with analysis of variance, Tukey's HSD, and G tests. RESULTS: The SBS was significantly lower in Group 2 than in Groups 1 (p = 0.024) and 3 (p = 0.017). Groups 1 and Group 3 did not differ (p = 0.991). ARI scores did not differ significantly among groups. CONCLUSIONS: The Pro-Relief(TM) desensitizer agent applied immediately before bonding significantly reduces bond strength, but the SBS values still exceed the minimum 5.9 - 7.8 MPa required for adequate clinical performance. Immersing the teeth in artificial saliva for 30 days after applying the Pro-Relief(TM) desensitizer agent and before bonding increased the SBS to control levels.
Adhesives ; Arginine ; Bicuspid ; Calcium ; Calcium Carbonate ; Collodion ; Dental Enamel ; Dentin Desensitizing Agents ; Humans ; Light ; New York ; Orthodontic Brackets ; Saliva, Artificial ; Shear Strength ; Tooth

INTRODUCTIONWe aimed to compare the effectiveness of intravenous piracetam with that of intravenous dimenhydrinate in the treatment of acute peripheral vertigo in the emergency department.

METHODSThis double-blind study comprised a total of 200 patients, aged between 18 and 70 years, who had presented to the emergency department of Ankara Training and Research Hospital and were diagnosed with peripheral vertigo. Evaluation of the severity of the patients' vertigo was performed using a visual analogue scale, before and after drug administration.

RESULTSBoth drugs were found to be effective (p < 0.001) and had comparable effects (p < 0.474). Dimenhydrinate was also found to have about two times the side effects of piracetam. Drowsiness was found to be the most common side effect of these two drugs.

CONCLUSIONDimenhydrinate and piracetam have similar levels of effectiveness with regard to acute vertigo. We conclude that piracetam, which has fewer side effects than dimenhydrinate, better vestibular compensation, and is effective for both acute and chronic vertigo, could be more frequently used in the emergency treatment of acute vertigo.

Acute Disease ; Adolescent ; Adult ; Aged ; Chi-Square Distribution ; Confidence Intervals ; Dimenhydrinate ; administration & dosage ; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug ; Double-Blind Method ; Drug Administration Schedule ; Emergency Service, Hospital ; Female ; Follow-Up Studies ; Humans ; Infusions, Intravenous ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Prospective Studies ; Statistics, Nonparametric ; Treatment Outcome ; Turkey ; Vertigo ; diagnosis ; drug therapy ; Young Adult