English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background: Restoration failure due to secondary caries is a continuing problem in restorative dentistry. Aims and objective: The present study is undertaken to see whether various fluoridated dentifrices recharge fluoride releasing restorative materials and, comparatively evaluate their recharging capabilities. Materials and method: Materials used in the study are Fuji II LC, Compomer, Teethmate F1, Alfadent sealant. Dentifrices used are Sodiumflouride and Sodiummonoflurophasphate releasing. All restorative materials were mixed according to manufacturer’s instruction and standardized test pellets were made using autoclaved instruments in sterile Teflon moulds. These test pellets were divided in various groups and brushed with various fluoridated and nonfluoridated dentifrices accordingly . Results were evaluated stastically using ANOVA , t-test and correlation coefficient for which regression lines were drawn. It was concluded that Sodiumfluoride containing dentifrices recharged fluoride releasing restorative material more than Sodium monoflurophasphate containing dentifrices

Vision is the Art of Seeing Things Invisible - An invitro Comparative Evaluation