目的:定量研究球帽附着体覆盖全口义齿(complete overdenture,COD)修复后咬合接触分布的变化,初步说明球帽附着体对义齿影响,为临床调牙合提供理论依据。方法:采用T-ScanⅡ咬合分析仪进行体内咬合分布特征及咬合时间的测定。全口义齿及...目的:定量研究球帽附着体覆盖全口义齿(complete overdenture,COD)修复后咬合接触分布的变化,初步说明球帽附着体对义齿影响,为临床调牙合提供理论依据。方法:采用T-ScanⅡ咬合分析仪进行体内咬合分布特征及咬合时间的测定。全口义齿及球帽附着体覆盖全口义齿修复后患者各16例。球帽覆盖义齿修复患者于粘固球帽前,粘固后3月进行咬合检测,全口义齿修复患者于义齿修复3月后检查咬合分布。记录咬合力中心(center of force,COF)前后位移值(Y),咬合力前后向分布比率,咬合时间。结果:双侧球帽覆盖义齿粘固球帽后咬合力逐渐增加,高于同期全口义齿,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。球帽覆盖义齿粘固3个月时咬合中心较粘固前前移,与同期全口义齿咬合中心差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。全口义齿咬合时间为0.29sec,双侧球帽粘固球帽前为0.27sec,粘固3个月时双侧球帽为0.25sec。差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:粘固球帽前覆盖义齿与全口义齿咬合分布状态相似。球帽覆盖义齿粘固球帽3个月内咬合力增大,前牙咬合接触增多,咬合中心前移明显。提示临床对球帽覆盖义齿应在双侧咬合分布平衡同时,注意调整前牙咬合分布。展开更多
目的分析磁性附着体在全口覆盖义齿中的应用价值。方法使用Magfif EX 600磁性附着体对15例全口覆盖义齿修复。粘固磁体前后进行固位力和咀嚼效率测试。并对义齿的固位、基牙健康状况,进行10～20个月的跟踪随访。采用SPSS10.0统计软件包...目的分析磁性附着体在全口覆盖义齿中的应用价值。方法使用Magfif EX 600磁性附着体对15例全口覆盖义齿修复。粘固磁体前后进行固位力和咀嚼效率测试。并对义齿的固位、基牙健康状况,进行10～20个月的跟踪随访。采用SPSS10.0统计软件包对测试数据进行分析。结果粘固磁体后,全口覆盖义齿的固位力和咀嚼效率显著提高(P<0.01)。12例修复效果满意,2例效果良好,1例效果改善。结论应用磁性附着体全口覆盖义齿可以显著提高义齿的固位力和咀嚼效率。展开更多
Aim: To compare the chewing process and swallowing threshold parameters of subjects with complete dentures and overdentures with data obtained from subjects with complete natural dentitions. Metho-dology: The chewing ...Aim: To compare the chewing process and swallowing threshold parameters of subjects with complete dentures and overdentures with data obtained from subjects with complete natural dentitions. Metho-dology: The chewing process in terms of swallowing threshold parameters of four groups of subjects with complete dentures (all females) was quantified by sieving particles after chewing of an artificial test ‘food’ and compared with that of subjects with com-plete natural dentitions as a reference group (33 sub-jects). All subjects (except those of the reference group) had a complete denture in the upper jaw. Regarding the lower jaw two groups with complete dentures (with high (24 subjects), respectively low mandible (12 subjects)) and two groups with overdentures (implant-retained (22 subjects), respectively natural root supported (19 subjects)) were composed. Results: The ‘overdenture-implants’ group needed significantly more chewing cycles and time (mean: 45 cycles in 32 seconds) until ‘swallowing’ compared to the group with complete natural dentitions (mean: 26 cycles in 19 seconds until ‘swallowing’). Also the ‘complete denture-low mandible’ group needed sig-nificantly more cycles and time (mean: 52 cycles in 44 seconds) until ‘swallowing’ than the complete dentition group. In the ‘overdenture-natural roots’ group these outcomes (33 cycles in 24 seconds) were not significantly different compared with the complete dentition group. The ‘complete denture-high mandi-ble’ group (32 cycles in 26 seconds) needed not sig-nificantly more cycles until ‘swallowing’, however time until ‘swallowing’ was significantly longer com-pared to the complete dentition group. All denture groups had significantly larger mean particle sizes when ‘swallowing’ (sizes in the order of 3 mm) than the natural dentition group (about 2 mm). Conclusion: Despite efforts to compensate for a reduced chewing efficiency, subjects with complete dentures (including overdentures) had 50% larger median particle si展开更多
文摘目的:定量研究球帽附着体覆盖全口义齿(complete overdenture,COD)修复后咬合接触分布的变化,初步说明球帽附着体对义齿影响,为临床调牙合提供理论依据。方法:采用T-ScanⅡ咬合分析仪进行体内咬合分布特征及咬合时间的测定。全口义齿及球帽附着体覆盖全口义齿修复后患者各16例。球帽覆盖义齿修复患者于粘固球帽前,粘固后3月进行咬合检测,全口义齿修复患者于义齿修复3月后检查咬合分布。记录咬合力中心(center of force,COF)前后位移值(Y),咬合力前后向分布比率,咬合时间。结果:双侧球帽覆盖义齿粘固球帽后咬合力逐渐增加,高于同期全口义齿,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。球帽覆盖义齿粘固3个月时咬合中心较粘固前前移,与同期全口义齿咬合中心差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。全口义齿咬合时间为0.29sec,双侧球帽粘固球帽前为0.27sec,粘固3个月时双侧球帽为0.25sec。差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:粘固球帽前覆盖义齿与全口义齿咬合分布状态相似。球帽覆盖义齿粘固球帽3个月内咬合力增大,前牙咬合接触增多,咬合中心前移明显。提示临床对球帽覆盖义齿应在双侧咬合分布平衡同时,注意调整前牙咬合分布。
文摘目的分析磁性附着体在全口覆盖义齿中的应用价值。方法使用Magfif EX 600磁性附着体对15例全口覆盖义齿修复。粘固磁体前后进行固位力和咀嚼效率测试。并对义齿的固位、基牙健康状况,进行10～20个月的跟踪随访。采用SPSS10.0统计软件包对测试数据进行分析。结果粘固磁体后,全口覆盖义齿的固位力和咀嚼效率显著提高(P<0.01)。12例修复效果满意,2例效果良好,1例效果改善。结论应用磁性附着体全口覆盖义齿可以显著提高义齿的固位力和咀嚼效率。
文摘Aim: To compare the chewing process and swallowing threshold parameters of subjects with complete dentures and overdentures with data obtained from subjects with complete natural dentitions. Metho-dology: The chewing process in terms of swallowing threshold parameters of four groups of subjects with complete dentures (all females) was quantified by sieving particles after chewing of an artificial test ‘food’ and compared with that of subjects with com-plete natural dentitions as a reference group (33 sub-jects). All subjects (except those of the reference group) had a complete denture in the upper jaw. Regarding the lower jaw two groups with complete dentures (with high (24 subjects), respectively low mandible (12 subjects)) and two groups with overdentures (implant-retained (22 subjects), respectively natural root supported (19 subjects)) were composed. Results: The ‘overdenture-implants’ group needed significantly more chewing cycles and time (mean: 45 cycles in 32 seconds) until ‘swallowing’ compared to the group with complete natural dentitions (mean: 26 cycles in 19 seconds until ‘swallowing’). Also the ‘complete denture-low mandible’ group needed sig-nificantly more cycles and time (mean: 52 cycles in 44 seconds) until ‘swallowing’ than the complete dentition group. In the ‘overdenture-natural roots’ group these outcomes (33 cycles in 24 seconds) were not significantly different compared with the complete dentition group. The ‘complete denture-high mandi-ble’ group (32 cycles in 26 seconds) needed not sig-nificantly more cycles until ‘swallowing’, however time until ‘swallowing’ was significantly longer com-pared to the complete dentition group. All denture groups had significantly larger mean particle sizes when ‘swallowing’ (sizes in the order of 3 mm) than the natural dentition group (about 2 mm). Conclusion: Despite efforts to compensate for a reduced chewing efficiency, subjects with complete dentures (including overdentures) had 50% larger median particle si
