{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.028931750741839762, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0066765578635014835, 'mean_word_length': 5.104072398190045, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Effect of one-step polishing systems on surface roughness of different flowable restorative materials.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of one-step polishing systems on the surface roughness of different flowable composites and a microhybrid composite. A total of 120 disks were fabricated and divided into six groups according to the different composite restorative materials tested (n = 20). Each group was further divided into four subgroups according to the polishing system (n = 5). For the control group, samples were left undisturbed after removal of Mylar strip. For the other three subgroups, samples were polished with PoGo, OptraPol, or Sof-Lex disks. Surface roughness was determined using a profilometer and observed under scanning electron microscope (SEM). Data were analyzed by one-way ANOVA and Duncan's multiple range test. For Tetric Flow, Grandio Flow, Filtek Supreme XT Flow, and Admira Flow, their lowest surface roughness values were obtained in Mylar Strip and PoGo groups. For Compoglass Flow, there were no significant differences between Mylar Strip, PoGo, and OptraPol. For Filtek Z250, the lowest surface roughness value was obtained with Mylar Strip. In light of the surface roughness results obtained, one-step polishing systems seemed to be a good choice for polishing flowable composites.