双期和单期矫治安氏Ⅱ类错疗效的Meta分析  

Clinical Effectiveness of two -phase treatment versus one -phase treatment for children with Class Ⅱ malocclusion:A Meta-analysis

作　　者：牟兰[1,2] 葛振林[2] 焦鑫[2] 徐庚池[2] 韩耀辉[2] 

机构地区：[1]兰州大学循证医学中心,730000 [2]兰州大学口腔医学院

出　　处：《现代口腔医学杂志》2013年第5期266-271,共6页Journal of Modern Stomatology

摘　　要：目的比较安氏Ⅱ类错儿童双期矫治和单期矫治的治疗效果。方法计算机检索Pubmed、Cochrane Library、Web of Science、中国生物医学文献数据库、中国期刊全文数据库、中国科技期刊全文数据库、万方数据库,收集所有比较安氏II类错双期矫治和单期矫治的随机对照试验(RCT),检索时限为各自数据库建库起至2012年11月12日。由两位研究者独立评价纳入研究的质量并提取资料后,采用RevMan 5.1软件进行Meta分析。结果最终纳入6个RCT,共888例患者。Meta分析结果显示,与单期矫治相比,双期矫治在矫治前后∠SNA的变化[MD=-0.41,95%CI(-0.87,0.04),P=0.08]、矫治后∠SNA的度数[MD=-0.05,95%CI(-0.25,0.15),P=0.62]、矫治前后∠SNB的变化[MD=-0.04,95%C(I-0.21,0.28),P=0.77]、矫治后∠SNB的度数[MD=-0.63,95%C(I-1.32,0.07),P=0.08]、矫治前后∠ANB的变化[MD=-0.58,95%C(I-1.36,0.21),P=0.15]、矫治后∠ANB的度数[MD=-0.12,95%CI(-0.52,0.27),P=0.54]、矫治前后的PAR指数变化[MD=-0.42,95%C(I-1.75,0.90),P=0.53]、矫治后的PAR指数[MD=-0.53,95%C(I-1.35,0.29),P=0.21]方面的差异没有统计学意义。结论安氏Ⅱ类错儿童双期矫治与单期矫治矫治效果相当。Objective To evaluate the clinical effectiveness of one-phase and two-phase treatments in patients with Class H malocclusion. Methods PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Web of science, CBM, CNKI, VIP, and WanFang Data were searched from the date of their establishment to November 12, 2012, to collect the randomized controlled trials （RCTs） about the clinical effectiveness of two-stage treatment versus one-stage treatment.The quality of the included studies was evaluated by two reviewers independently, and meta-analysis was performed by using RevMan 5.1 software. Results Six RCTs including 888 patients were identified. The results of meta-analyses demonstrated that there was no significant difference between the one-phase and two-phase groups in transformation of the SNA angle during treatment （MD= -0.41, 95% Ch -0.87 to 0.04, P=0.08）, the SNA angle after treatment （MD= -0.05, 95%Ch -0.25 to 0.15, P： 0.62）, transformation of the SNB angle （MD= -0.04, 95% Ch -0.21 to 0.28, P=0.77）, the SNB angle after treatment （MD=-0.63, 95%CI ： -1.32 to 0.07, P：0.08）, transformation of the ANB angle during treatment （MD=-0.58, 95%Ch -1.36 to 0.21, P=0.15）, the ANB angle after trentment （MD= -0.12,95%Ch-0.52 to 0.27, P=0.54）, transformation of the peer assessment rating（PAR） （MD= -0.42, 95% Ch -1.75 to 0.90, P：0.75）, the peer assessment rating（PAR） after treatment（MD= -0.53, 95% CI ： -1.35 to 0.29, P=0.21）. Conclusion The eephalometry and PAR of one-phase and two-phase treatments in patients with Class Ⅱ malocclusion are similar. [Key words] Class Ⅱ malocclusion Two-phase treatment One-phase treatment Meta-analysis Randomized controlled trial

关 键 词：Ⅱ类错[牙合] 双期矫治 单期矫治 META分析 随机对照试验 

分 类 号：R783.5[医药卫生—口腔医学]