两种方法拔除下颌阻生第三磨牙后病人生活质量的比较  

Comparison of two techniques in the effect on postoperative quality of life of extracting impacted mandibular third molar

作　　者：杨擎天[1] 胡开进[1] 薛洋[1] 周宏志[1] 秦瑞峰[1] 敖建华[1] 

机构地区：[1]第四军医大学口腔医学院,陕西西安710032

出　　处：《牙体牙髓牙周病学杂志》2009年第12期702-705,共4页Chinese Journal of Conservative Dentistry

摘　　要：目的:比较传统凿骨劈冠法与改良涡轮机法拔除下颌阻生第三磨牙时,对病人术后生活质量的影响。方法:600例下颌阻生第三磨牙病例,其中300例使用传统的凿骨劈冠法拔除,另300例使用改良涡轮机法拔除,采用改良的术后症状严重度量表(PoSSe)综合量化评价病人拔牙术后的生活质量,将两组分数进行分析比较。结果:改良涡轮机法与凿骨劈冠法的PoSSe分值分别为26.9865±15.3992和19.9381±13.1045。改良涡轮机法拔除下颌阻生第三磨牙的PoSSe分值明显低于传统的凿骨劈冠法(P<0.05)。结论:与凿骨劈冠法相比,改良涡轮机法拔除下颌阻生第三磨牙对病人术后生活质量影响较小。AIM ： To investigate the effect on postoperative quality of life of extraction of impacted mandibular wisdom teeth using turbine drill and dental chisel. METHODS： The 600 examples of impacted mandibular third molar were divided into 2 group with each of 300 examples. In group A the turbine drill was used to extract the impacted mandibular third molar. In group B the dental chisel was used to extract the impacted mandibular third molar. We use the PoSSe Scale to measure the severity of symptoms after extraction of third molars, and compare the scores. RESULTS： The PoSSe scores in group A and B was 26. 9865 ±15. 3992 and 19. 9381 ± 13. 1045. The PoSSe scores in group A was lower （ P 〈 0.05 ）. CONCLUSION ： Turbine drill and new instruments method is superior to dental chisel method in the extraction of impacted madibular wisdom teeth.

关 键 词：阻生第三磨牙 牙拔除术 涡轮机 劈冠法 生活质量 器域 

分 类 号：R782[医药卫生—口腔医学]