Suppr超能文献

种植体支持式覆盖义齿的清洁能力及患者满意度:两种附着方式的回顾性比较

Cleansability of and patients' satisfaction with implant-retained overdentures: a retrospective comparison of two attachment methods.

作者信息

Ambard Alberto J, Fanchiang Ju-Chun, Mueninghoff Leonard, Dasanayake Ananda P

机构信息

University of Alabama at Birmingham, School of Dentistry, USA.

出版信息

J Am Dent Assoc. 2002 Sep;133(9):1237-42; quiz 1261. doi: 10.14219/jada.archive.2002.0365.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Two important factors in the use of implant-retained overdentures are cleansability and patients' satisfaction. Limited research has been published concerning the cleansability of these overdentures On the other hand, studies have compared patients' satisfaction with conventional dentures and various designs of implant overdentures. However, no studies have compared overdentures retained by Hader bars (Sterngold, Attleboro, Mass.) and direct ERA attachments (Sterngold) in terms of both cleansability and patients' satisfaction.

PURPOSE

The authors' aim was to determine the cleansability of and patients' acceptance of overdentures retained by direct ERA attachments and overdentures supported by a Hader bar with distal ERA attachments and a Hader clip.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two groups of 10 subjects each were evaluated: Group A, consisting of patients with overdentures retained by direct ERA attachments, and Group B, consisting of patients with overdentures retained by Hader bars. The authors evaluated the subjects between 18 and 24 months after the delivery of the overdentures by means of a questionnaire and a clinical examination to score each patient on gingival, plaque and calculus indexes.

RESULTS

Group A exhibited better results than Group B on calculus, plaque and gingival indexes, but the difference was not statistically significant. The authors found no significant difference between the two experimental groups in satisfaction.

CONCLUSIONS

When evaluated in terms of subjects' satisfaction and calculus, plaque and gingival index scores, implant-retained overdentures supported by direct ERA attachments were similar to those supported by a Hader bar.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

The two types of overdentures studied are equally satisfactory and easy to clean. Other factors such as biomechanics, patients' preference and previous experience may be more critical when selecting the retention design for an overdenture supported by four implants.

摘要

背景

使用种植体支持的覆盖义齿时,两个重要因素是清洁性和患者满意度。关于这些覆盖义齿清洁性的研究发表有限。另一方面,已有研究比较了患者对传统义齿和各种设计的种植覆盖义齿的满意度。然而,尚无研究在清洁性和患者满意度两方面比较Hader杆(Sterngold,马萨诸塞州阿特尔伯勒)固位的覆盖义齿和直接ERA附着体(Sterngold)固位的覆盖义齿。

目的

作者旨在确定直接ERA附着体固位的覆盖义齿以及带有远端ERA附着体和Hader夹的Hader杆支持的覆盖义齿的清洁性和患者接受度。

材料与方法

对两组各10名受试者进行评估:A组为直接ERA附着体固位覆盖义齿的患者,B组为Hader杆固位覆盖义齿的患者。作者在覆盖义齿交付后18至24个月,通过问卷调查和临床检查对受试者进行评估,以对每位患者的牙龈、菌斑和牙石指数进行评分。

结果

A组在牙石、菌斑和牙龈指数方面的结果优于B组,但差异无统计学意义。作者发现两个实验组在满意度方面无显著差异。

结论

从受试者满意度以及牙石、菌斑和牙龈指数评分方面评估时,直接ERA附着体支持的种植体固位覆盖义齿与Hader杆支持的覆盖义齿相似。

临床意义

所研究的两种类型的覆盖义齿在满意度和清洁方面同样令人满意。在为四颗种植体支持的覆盖义齿选择固位设计时,生物力学、患者偏好和既往经验等其他因素可能更为关键。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验