This study aimed to compare the flexural strength, surface roughness, and microhardness of a resin for three-dimensional (3D) printing and a conventional composite resin and to evaluate whether the printing orientation influences these properties. To evaluate the flexural resistance, test specimens were produced and divided into four groups: three groups of resins for 3D printing with inclinations of 0°, 45°, and 90°, and one group of conventional composite resin. Forty discs were produced and subjected to a sandpaper-polishing sequence, and the surface roughness was measured using a roughness meter. The Vickers microhardness test was performed at three different points, and the average was obtained. The results were subjected to ANOVA statistical analysis and Tukey's test. There were statistical differences in the flexural strength and microhardness between the conventional resin and the resin used for 3D printing. No statistical difference in surface roughness was observed. The resin for 3D printing exhibited lower flexural strength and microhardness than conventional composite resins. We concluded that the resin for 3D printing had lower flexural strength and hardness than the conventional composite resin but similar surface roughness. The printing orientation did not affect the flexural strength, whereas the hardness increased as the printing angle increased.

: The objetive of this study was to evaluated the quality of sleep, degree of drowsiness, and stress index of dentistry students during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: This study was conducted among dentistry students from two universities, obtaining data at baseline and 10 months after the pandemic. The Pittsburgh questionnaire, Epworth sleepiness scale, and Cohen perceived stress scale were used to assess sleep quality, sleepiness index, and stress level, respectively. Statistical analyses were performed using Generalized Estimating Equations, with binary, ordinal, and linear logistic regression. Results: Baseline sleep quality had a positive influence on sleep quality compared with the assessment after 10 months. Drowsiness is influenced by factors, such as the time of assessment, income of up to one salary, and physical activity. There was greater drowsiness 10 months after the pandemic. High stress levels were observed during both assessments. Female sex, deteriorated family relationships, and lack of physical activity increase the risk of stress. Conclusion: The quality of sleep was positively affected during the pandemic period, remaining high, and drowsiness increased.