Comparison of clinical application and effect of three types of optical guide rod protection

JIANG Wei; LI Xue; LIAO Xueyang; CAO Dong

doi:10.15956/j.cnki.chin.j.conserv.dent.2026.01.009

Abstract：Objective Under the premise of preventing cross infection,the effects of three optical guide rod protection on curing effect of resin was compared.Methods Three methods were used to protect the optical guide rod.For the non-protective film group,wipe disinfection method was used.For the protection-film groups,conventional protective film(hard protective cover)and smooth protective film(soft protective film)were used to cover the optical guide rod respectively.In clinical practice,the three protection methods were employed during the treatment of the same patient for light curing operation.After use,the non-protective film group was wiped with disinfecting wipes,whereas the protective film were removed from the protection-film groups.Samples were collected directly from the surface of the optical guide rod for bacterial culture and colony count.The effects of three protective methods on the output light intensity and resin curing were assessed by the light intensity measuring instrument and the microhardness tester.Results All three protection methods effectively prevented cross infection.Compared with the no-protection-film group,neither protective film significantly affect the output light intensity of the light-curing unit or the microhardness of the cured resin.There are no statistically significant differences among the three groups(P＞0.05).However,a certain downward trend in the mean resin microhardness values was observed in the conventional film group(11.1%decrease)and the smooth film group(13.01%decrease).Conclusion All three protection methods are effective for infection control.Among them,the smooth protective film,due to its excellent conformability ensuring the optimal curing distance,is more practical in clinical operation and represents an cost-effective infection control measure worthy of promotion.Future research should focus on the potential slight light attenuation caused by protective films and its clinical implications.