机构地区:[1]泰安市口腔医院修复科,271000
出 处:《中国实用医药》2022年第25期88-91,共4页China Practical Medicine
摘 要:目的 评价固定义齿、活动义齿联合修复在低位咬合重建治疗中的疗效。方法 30例垂直距离降低并伴牙列缺损的患者,均采用固定义齿、活动义齿联合修复进行低位咬合重建,其中13例以固定义齿修复为主、17例以活动义齿修复为主。对修复前、修复后1、6个月的口腔健康影响程度量表中文版(OHIP-14)评分进行比较。结果 修复后1、6个月, 13例以固定义齿修复为主的患者总评分、功能限制评分、生理性疼痛评分、心理不适评分、生理障碍评分、心理障碍评分、社交障碍评分、残障评分分别为(1.41±0.84)、(0.34±0.24)、(0.21±0.12)、(0.10±0.05)、(0.76±0.43)、(0.00±0.00)、(0.00±0.00)、(0.00±0.00)分与(0.62±0.35)、(0.32±0.31)、(0.20±0.04)、(0.00±0.00)、(0.10±0.00)、(0.00±0.00)、(0.00±0.00)、(0.00±0.00)分,均低于修复前的(13.80±6.44)、(2.12±0.99)、(2.42±0.87)、(1.54±1.32)、(3.45±1.01)、(1.56±0.78)、(1.76±0.82)、(1.02±0.65)分,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);修复后6个月的生理障碍评分低于修复后1个月,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。修复后1、6个月, 17例以活动义齿修复为主的患者总评分、功能限制评分、生理性疼痛评分、心理不适评分、生理障碍评分、心理障碍评分、社交障碍评分、残障评分分别为(6.69±2.05)、(1.65±0.45)、(1.53±0.52)、(0.72±0.32)、(1.87±0.43)、(0.24±0.09)、(0.55±0.14)、(0.13±0.10)分与(0.87±0.30)、(0.32±0.12)、(0.21±0.03)、(0.22±0.12)、(0.12±0.03)、(0.00±0.00)、(0.00±0.00)、(0.00±0.00)分,均低于修复前的(14.68±7.77)、(2.32±0.88)、(2.01±1.02)、(1.62±1.23)、(3.55±1.13)、(1.98±1.65)、(1.86±0.89)、(1.34±0.97)分,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);修复后6个月的总评分、功能限制评分、生理性疼痛评分、心理不适评分、生理障碍评分低于修复后1个月,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论 对于垂直距离降低并伴牙列缺损的患者,采用固定义�Objective To evaluate the efficacy of combined restoration of fixed denture and removable denture in reconstruction of infraocclusion. Methods All 30 patients with reduced vertical distance and dentition defect underwent combined restoration of fixed dentures and removable dentures for reconstruction of infraocclusion, of which 13 cases were mainly repaired with fixed dentures, and 17 cases were mainly repaired with removable dentures. The validated Chinese version of the Oral Health Impact Profile(OHIP-14) scores before and 1 and 6 months after restoration were compared. Results At 1 and 6 months after restoration, the total score, functional limitation score, physical pain score, psychological discomfort score, physical disability score,psychological disability score, social disability score, and disability score of 13 patients with mainly fixed denture restorations were(1.41±0.84),(0.34±0.24),(0.21±0.12),(0.10±0.05),(0.10±0.05),(0.76±0.43),(0.00±0.00),(0.00±0.00),(0.00±0.00),(0.00±0.00) points and(0.62±0.35),(0.32±0.31),(0.20±0.04),(0.00±0.00),(0.10±0.00),(0.00±0.00),(0.00±0.00),(0.00±0.00),(0.00±0.00),(0.00±0.00) points, which were lower than(13.80±6.44),(2.12±0.99),(2.42±0.87),(1.54±1.32),(3.45±1.01),(1.56±0.78),(1.76±0.82),(1.02±0.65) points before restoration, and the differences were all statistically significant(P<0.05). The physiological disability score at 6 months after restoration was lower than that at 1 month after restoration, and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05). At 1 and 6 months after restoration, the total score, functional limitation score,physical pain score, psychological discomfort score, physical disability score, psychological disability score, social disability score, and disability score of 17 patients with mainly removable denture restorations were(6.69±2.05),(1.65±0.45),(1.53±0.52),(0.72±0.32),(1.87±0.43),(0.24±0.09),(0.55±0.14),(0.13±0.10) points and(0.87±0.30),(0.32±0.12),(0.21±0.03),(0.22±0.12),(0.12±0.03),(0.00±0.00),(
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...