THE JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY SHABANIAN AND RICHARDS

656 VOLUME 87 NUMBER 6

6. Fruits TJ, Coury TL, Miranda FJ, Duncanson MG Jr. Uses and propertiesof current glass ionomer cements: a review. Gen Dent 1996;44:410-8;quiz 421-2.

7. Hotz P, McLean JW, Sced I, Wilson AD. The bonding of glass ionomercements to metal and tooth substrates. Br Dent J 1977;142:41-7.

8. Modesto A, Chevitarese O, Cury JA, Vieira AR. VariGlass fluoride releaseand uptake by an adjacent tooth. Am J Dent 1997;10:123-7.

9. Peutzfeldt A, Garcia-Godoy F, Asmussen E. Surface hardness and wear ofglass ionomers and compomers. Am J Dent 1997;10:15-7.

10. Simonsen RJ. Glass ionomer as fissure sealant—a critical review. J PublicHealth Dent 1996;56:146-9; discussion 161-3.

11. Forss H, Seppa L, Lappalainen R. In vitro abrasion resistance and hard-ness of glass-ionomer cements. Dent Mater 1991;7:36-9.

12. Momoi Y, Hirosaki H, Kohno A, McCabe JF. In vitro toothbrush-dentifriceabrasion of resin-modified glass ionomers. Dent Mater 1997;13:82-8.

13. de Gee AJ, van Duinen RN, Werner A, Davidson CL. Early and long-termwear of conventional and resin-modified glass ionomers. J Dent Res1996;75:1613-9.

14. de Gee AJ, Pallav P. Occlusal wear simulation with the ACTA wearmachine. J Dent 1994;22(Suppl 1):S21-7.

15. Kaidonis JA, Richards LC, Townsend GC, Tansley GD. Wear of humanenamel: a quantitative in vitro assessment. J Dent Res 1998;77:1983-90.

16. Burak N, Kaidonis JA, Richards LC, Townsend GC. Experimental studiesof human dentine wear. Arch Oral Biol 1999;44:885-7.

17. Bartlett D, Smith BNG. Definition, classification and clinical assessmentof attrition, erosion and abrasion of enamel and dentine. In: Addy M,Embery G, Edgar WM, Orchardson R, editors. Tooth wear and sensitivi-

ty: clinical advances in restorative dentistry. London: Martin Dunitz Ltd;2000. p. 87.

18. Milosevic A, Kelly MJ, McLean AN. Sports supplement drinks and den-tal health in competitive swimmers and cyclists. Br Dent J1997;182:303-8.

19. Eccles JD, Jenkins WG. Dental erosion and diet. J Dent 1974;2:153-9.20. Shaker R, Dodds WJ, Helm JF, Kern MK, Hogan WJ. Regional esophageal

distribution and clearance of refluxed gastric acid. Gastroenterology1991;101:355-9.

21. Mount GJ. Cutting instruments used in tooth restoration. In: Mount GJ,Hume WR, editors. Preservation and restoration of tooth structure.London: Mosby; 1998. p. 52-3.

Reprint requests to:DR M. SHABANIANIKOO

DENTAL SCHOOL

ADELAIDE UNIVERSITY SA 5005AUSTRALIA

FAX: (618)8303-3444E-MAIL: mitra.shabanian@adelaide.edu.au

Copyright © 2002 by The Editorial Council of The Journal of ProstheticDentistry.

0022-3913/2002/$35.00 + 0. 10/1/125609

doi:10.1067/mpr.2002.125609

A clinical and microbiological evaluation of denturecleansers for geriatric patients in long-term care institu-tions. Gornitsky M, Paradis I, Landaverde G, Malo AM, Velly AM. JCan Dent Assoc 2002;68:39-45.

Purpose. The purpose of this study was to determine the ability of 3 different denture cleansersto reduce Candida and bacteria on dentures in a geriatric population living in a long-term careinstitution.Material and methods.Twenty-seven patients (14 men and 13 women; mean age of 84 years) par-ticipated in the study. Subjects were assigned to 1 of 4 groups with each group receiving 1 of 3denture cleansers or water as the control. The denture cleansers—Denture Brite, PolidentOvernight, and Efferdent New Concentrated Blue Tablet—were of somewhat differentchemistries. A crossover design was used, with each group going through test periods of 1 weekwater and 1 week denture cleanser. After 1 week of water wash-out, the group was switched to thenext cleanser until all groups had used each cleanser. Microbiological samples were obtained beforeand after each test period. Statistical analysis was used to rank differences between the before- andafter-treatment scores. The efficacy of each cleanser in reducing the accumulation of plaque, stain,and food was assessed.Results.The rank of the differences in the number of colony-forming units of Candida spp. beforeand after 1 week of Denture Brite and Polident use was significantly greater than that of the con-trol group. There was no difference between the Efferdent group and control. No significantdifferences in the reduction of Streptococcus mutans were observed between Denture Brite orPolident and the control group, but dentures cleaned with Efferdent exhibited a significantly larg-er reduction in Streptococcus mutans than dentures cleaned with water. Over all study periods, therewere no significant differences among the cleansers in the reduction of Candida spp. orStreptococcus mutans.Conclusion.Within the parameters of this study, the authors concluded that the use of denturecleansers significantly reduced the number of microorganisms on dentures in a hospitalized geri-atric population. 22 References.—ME Razzoog

Noteworthy Abstractsof theCurrent Literature