摘要
目的对比磁性附着体与传统卡环固位体在老年全口覆盖义齿修复中的治疗效果及对牙周健康的影响。方法116例口腔科牙列缺损老年患者作为本次研究对象,随机分为对照组和治疗组,各58例。治疗组给予磁性附着体进行覆盖义齿修复,对照组给予传统卡环固位体进行覆盖义齿修复。对比两组治疗效果和牙周健康情况。结果治疗后1年,治疗组Ⅰ度松动30例、Ⅱ度松动25例、Ⅲ度松动3例;对照组Ⅰ度松动2例、Ⅱ度松动23例、Ⅲ度松动33例。治疗组牙松动度明显优于对照组,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。治疗组咀嚼功能、语言功能、舒适性、固位与美观功能评分分别为(8.74±0.75)、(9.41±0.67)、(8.47±0.56)、(7.62±0.30)分,均高于对照组的(7.14±1.22)、(8.81±0.52)、(7.28±0.69)、(6.92±0.83)分,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。治疗组龈沟液量(27.83±0.52)μg,龈沟出血指数(1.83±0.05)级,牙槽骨高度(5.59±0.12)mm,牙周袋深度(2.72±0.30)mm明显优于对照组的(36.27±0.45)μg、(3.46±0.17)级、(3.84±0.36)mm、(3.39±0.53)mm,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。随访1年,两组并发症发生率比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。治疗组满意度100.00%高于对照组的87.93%,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论磁性附着体治疗老年全口覆盖义齿修复的效果优于传统卡环固位体治疗,可有效提高治疗效果,降低牙齿松动率,保证患者的基本咀嚼功能、语言功能,并最大程度的保持患者牙齿的美观性,降低并发症发生率,值得临床推广。
Objective To compare the therapeutic effect of magnetic attachment and traditional clasp retainer in the repair of complete overdenture in the elderly and its influence on periodontal health.Methods A total of 116 elderly patients with dentition defect in stomatology department as study subjects were randomly divided into control group and treatment group,with 58 cases in each group.The treatment group received magnetic attachment for overdenture repair,and the control group received traditional clasp retainer for overdenture repair.The therapeutic effect and periodontal health status in the two groups was compared.Results After 1 year of treatment,the treatment group hadⅠdegree of tooth mobility in 30 cases,Ⅱdegree of tooth mobility in 25 cases,Ⅲdegree of tooth mobility in 3 cases in the treatment group,and the control group hadⅠdegree of tooth mobility in 2 cases,Ⅱdegree of tooth mobility in 23 cases,Ⅲdegree of tooth mobility in 33 cases.The tooth mobility degree in the treatment group was obviously better than those in the control group,and their difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).The mastication function,language function,comfort,retention and aesthetic function score were(8.74±0.75),(9.41±0.67),(8.47±0.56)and(7.62±0.30)points in the treatment,which were all higher than(7.14±1.22),(8.81±0.52),(7.28±0.69)and(6.92±0.83)points in the control group,and their difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).The gingival crevicular fluid volume(27.83±0.52)μg,sulcus bleeding index(1.83±0.05)degree,alveolar height(5.59±0.12)mm and probing depth(2.72±0.30)mm in the treatment group was obviously better than(36.27±0.45)μg,(3.46±0.17)degree,(3.84±0.36)mm and(3.39±0.53)mm in the control group,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).After 1 year follow-up,there was no statistically significant difference in incidence of complications(P>0.05).The degree of satisfaction was 100.00%in the treatment group,which was higher than 87.93%in the control group,and the diffe
作者
金鼎
杜暘
JIN Ding;DU Yang(The Second Affiliated Hospital of Jinzhou Medical University,Jinzhou 121000,China)
出处
《中国现代药物应用》
2019年第22期32-34,共3页
Chinese Journal of Modern Drug Application
