探讨前牙美容修复中采用树脂贴面与瓷贴面治疗的临床疗效差异  

Exploring the Difference in Clinical Efficacy between Resin Veneer and Porcelain Veneer in the Cosmetic Restoration of Anterior Teeth

作　　者：杨佰龙 YANG Bai-long(Department of Stomatology,Lincang People's Hospital,Lincang,Yunnan Province,677000 China)

机构地区：[1]云南省临沧市人民医院口腔科,云南临沧677000

出　　处：《世界复合医学》2019年第2期148-150,共3页World Journal of Complex Medicine

摘　　要：目的探讨前牙美容修复中采用树脂贴面与瓷贴面治疗的临床疗效差异。方法选择自2016年3月—2017年3月收治的100例前牙美容修复患者为对象,均接受前牙美容修复。按照随机数字表法分成两组,命名为对照组与研究组,各有50例。对照组实施树脂贴面治疗方法,研究组实施瓷贴面治疗方法。比较分析两组临床治疗效果、临床治疗满意度、治疗前后生活质量评分及不良反应发生情况。结果研究组的临床成功率为96.00%,明显高于对照组(χ~2=5.0051,P<0.05);研究组的临床治疗满意度为96.00%,明显高于对照组(2=6.0606,P<0.05);研究组治疗前的生活质量评分[包括总体健康评分为(53.85±9.20)分、生理功能评分为(61.05±10.30)分、生理职能评分为(52.85±8.70)分、躯体疼痛评分为(58.93±9.50)分、活力评分为(61.87±8.75)分、社会功能评分为(68.55±10.40)分、情感职能评分为(71.25±11.50)分、精神健康评分为(57.35±8.70)分]均与对照组无差异性(t=0.022 0,0.039 7,24.604 8,0.033 9,0.032 2,0.019 5,0.017 7,0.023 3,P>0.05);研究组治疗后的生活质量评分[包括总体健康评分为(74.30±12.20)分、生理功能评分为(72.70±13.85)分、生理职能评分为(65.40±10.25)分、躯体疼痛评分为(69.82±11.35)分、活力评分为(80.40±14.55)分、社会功能评分为(81.35±14.70)分、情感职能评分为(90.15±12.70)分、精神健康评分为(76.55±13.65分)]均明显高于对照组(t=4.366 5,2.107 7,24.777 8,2.193 1,2.647 2,2.008 0,3.881 8,3.327 9,P<0.05);研究组的不良反应发生率为4.00%,明显低于对照组(χ~2=8.305 6,P<0.05)。结论前牙美容修复中采用瓷贴面治疗的临床疗效明显高于树脂贴面,且治疗满意度更高,治疗安全性更高。Objective To investigate the clinical efficacy of resin veneer and porcelain veneer in the treatment of anterior teeth.Methods A total of 100 anterior cosmetic restoration patients from March 2016 to March 2017 were selected.All of them received cosmetic restoration of the anterior teeth,which were divided into 2 groups according to the random number table method,named control group and study group,each with 50 cases.The control group was treated with a resin veneer treatment method,and the research group implemented a porcelain veneer treatment method.The clinical treatment effect,clinical treatment satisfaction,quality of life score before and after treatment and adverse reactions were compared and analyzed.Results The clinical success rate of the study group was 96.00%,which was significantly higher than that of the control group(χ^2=5.005 1,P<0.05).The clinical treatment satisfaction of the study group was 96.00%,which was significantly higher than that of the control group(χ^2=6.060 6,P<0.05);the quality of life score of the study group before treatment[including the overall health score(53.85±9.20)points,physiological function score(61.05±10.30)points,physiological function score(52.85±8.70)points,somatic pain score was(58.93±9.50)points,the vitality score was(61.87±8.75)points,the social function score was(68.55±10.40)points,the emotional function score was(71.25±11.50)points,and the mental health score was(57.35±8.70)points.There was no difference between the two groups(t=0.022 0,0.039 7,24.604 8,0.033 9,0.032 2,0.019 5,0.017 7,0.023 3,P>0.05);the quality of life score after treatment in the study group[including the overall health score was(74.30±12.20)points,the physiological function score was(72.70±13.85)points,the physiological function score was(65.40±10.25)points,the somatic pain score was(69.82±11.35)points,the vitality score was(80.40±14.55)points,and the social function score was(81.35±14.70)points,emotional function scores(90.15±12.70)points,mental health scores(76.55±13.65)po

关 键 词：前牙美容修复 树脂贴面 瓷贴面 临床疗效 

分 类 号：R78[医药卫生—口腔医学]