牙颈部牙本质敏感不同评估方法相关性研究  

Correlation analysis of assessment methods for cervical dentine hypersensitivity

作　　者：张靖[1] 李磊涛[2] 魏朝[3] 陈曦[4] 台保军[4] 江汉[4] 杜民权[4] ZHANG Jing LI Leitao WEI Zhao CHEN Xi TAI Baojun JIANG Han DU Minquan(Center of Stomatology, Xiangya Hospital, Changsha 410008, China)

机构地区：[1]中南大学湘雅医院口腔医学中心,湖南长沙410008 [2]中南大学湘雅口腔医院口腔预防科,湖南长沙410008 [3]保定市第二医院口腔科,河北保定071051 [4]武汉大学口腔医院预防科,湖北武汉430079

出　　处：《口腔医学》2016年第10期927-929,共3页Stomatology

摘　　要：目的研究三种牙颈部牙本质敏感评估方法之间的相关性。方法本研究采用Yeaple电子压力敏感探针评估牙颈部牙本质对接触刺激的敏感程度,采用Schiff冷空气敏感指数和视觉模拟评分法(Visual Analogue Scale,VAS)评估冷空气刺激后的敏感程度。在0周、4周及8周进行检测,对所得数据进行分析。结果 Schiff冷空气敏感指数和视觉模拟评分法始终保持良好的相关性并具有统计学意义(R=0.26,P=0.003、R=0.49,P=4.18×10-9及R=0.57,P=5.32×10-12),Schiff冷空气敏感指数和Yeaple探针在8周时相关性良好(r=-0.41,P=2.01×10-6),Yeaple探针与视觉模拟评分法相关性较差。结论在评估牙颈部牙本质敏感的临床试验中,Schiff冷空气敏感指数和视觉模拟评分法可以二者选一,联合使用敏感压力探针法。Objective To analyze the correlation between three assessment methods for cervical dentine hypersensitivity. Methods The assessment methods used to quantify sensitivity were the Yeaple Sensitivity Sensor Probe, Schiff scale and Visual Analogue Scale （ VAS） . The data of 0, 4th and 8th weeks were used to analyze the correlation of these three methods. Results The Schiff scale and VAS had good correlation consistency （r=0.26,P=0.003、r=0.49,P=4.18×10-9 and r=0.57,P=5.32×10-12） with statistical significance. Schiff scale and Yeaple scale had good correlation consistency at 8th week （r=-0.41,P=2.01×10-6）, while the correlation consistency of Yeaple scale and VAS was poor. Conclusion Schiff scale and VAS can be alternative at clinical trial, and combine with the Yeaple scale.

关 键 词：牙本质敏感 敏感压力探针法 Schiff冷空气敏感指数 视觉模拟评分法 

分 类 号：R781.2[医药卫生—口腔医学]