正畸托槽简易间接黏结与直接黏结的比较  

Comparison between Simplified Indirect Bonding and Direct Bonding of Bracket

作　　者：石东晓[1] 陈杰[1] 刘珺[1] 

机构地区：[1]青岛大学医学院附属医院口腔正畸科,山东青岛266003

出　　处：《医学新知》2006年第6期338-339,共2页New Medicine

摘　　要：目的探讨简易正畸托槽间接黏结技术的临床效果。方法将恒牙期正畸患者22例随机分为2组,分别采用直接黏结法(直接黏结组,12例)和简易间接黏结技术(间接黏结组,10例)黏结托槽。比较2组总操作时间、椅旁操作时间和托槽脱落率。结果与直接黏结组相比,间接黏结组总操作时间增加,但椅旁操作时间减少,均具显著性差异(P<0．01);托槽脱落率2组无统计学差异(P>0．05)。结论直接黏结法与简易间接黏结法均能达到理想的托槽黏结效果。简易间接黏结法可降低治疗成本,合理分配操作时间,减轻医生和患者的就诊压力。Objective To evaluate the simplified indirect bonding with chemically cured direct bonding of bracket in the total operation time, clinical operation time and the failure rates. Methods Twenty - two patients （9 males and 13 females）, whose average age was 12.6 years （from 11 to 16 years） with malocclusion, were ran- domly divided into 2 groups. One group was treated with simplified indirect bonding, the other with chemically cured direct bonding. Results The results showed that the total operation time of indirect bonding was 0. 27 hours more than that of direct bonding. But the clinical operation time is 0.38 hours less. The difference of the two indexes was statistically significant while the failure rate had no significant difference.Conclusion Both the simplified direct bonding and indirect bonding can obtain an ideal result of bracket bonding. The simplified indirect boding can reduce laboratory costs and chairtime, not to mention stress to the orthodontist, staff, and patients.

关 键 词：间接黏结 托槽 正畸 

分 类 号：R783[医药卫生—口腔医学]