两种方法矫治恒牙列后期安氏Ⅱ类1分类错牙合的效果分析  

Analysis of two methods in later permanent dentition cases with Class II division 1malocclusion

作　　者：韦玲[1] 潘莹[1] 彭美姣[1] 

机构地区：[1]广西河池市人民医院口腔科,广西河池547000

出　　处：《中国美容医学》2015年第7期63-65,共3页Chinese Journal of Aesthetic Medicine

基　　金：广西河池市科技局科研项目(1378-7);项目名称:改良斜面导板在恒牙列后期安氏Ⅱ类1分类错牙合的临床应用研究;合同编号:河科推1378-7

摘　　要：目的:分析"标准方丝弓矫治技术"与"分裂簧式改良斜面导板+标准方丝弓矫治技术"两种矫治方法对恒牙列后期安氏Ⅱ类1分类错牙合的疗效。方法:选择60例上颌缩窄型恒牙列后期安氏Ⅱ类1分类错牙合患者,随机分为实验组和对照组,实验组30例用"分裂簧式改良斜面导板+标准方丝弓矫治技术"矫治,对照组30例用标准方丝弓矫治技术进行矫治,分析两种矫治方法打开咬合时间及矫治完成的时间,矫治器脱落情况。结果:实验组在打开咬合及治疗完成的时间上与对照组相比明显缩短,而矫治器脱落率明显低于对照组。结论:分裂簧式改良斜面导板+标准方丝弓矫治技术的联合应用,提高了恒牙列后期安氏Ⅱ类1分类错牙合的治疗效果,降低了矫治器脱落率,大大缩短了矫治疗程。Objective To analyse effects of standard edgewise appliance technique only and standard edgewise appliance technique combining with modified inclined bite-plate with Split spring on later Permanent dentition cases with Class II division 1 malocclusion. Methods 60 patients with retracted maxillary of Class II division 1 malocclusion were averagely randomized into the treatment group and control group.Standard edgewise appliance technique combining with modified inclined bite-plate was used in treatment group and standard edgewise appliance technique was used in anther group, comparing how long those two methods taked to open.occlusion,how long they take to finish treatment , and the cases of dropping appliance. Results The period in the treatment group was much less than the control group,and the cases of dropping appliance in the former was also much fewer. Conclusion Affects of edgewise appliance technique combining with modified inclined bite-plate with Split spring on later Permanent dentition cases with Class II division 1 malocclusion were improved,with obviously decreasing cases of dropping appliance and shortening the course of treatment.

关 键 词：恒牙列后期 缩窄型安氏Ⅱ类1分类错牙合 分裂簧式改良斜面导板 标准方丝弓技术 

分 类 号：R783.5[医药卫生—口腔医学]