Loggner Graff Ingela, Asklöw Barbro, Thorstensson Helene
Department of Periodontology/Endodontics, The Institute for Postgraduate Dental Education, Jönköping, Sweden.
Swed Dent J. 2009;33(3):105-13.
The aim of this randomized clinical study was to compare full-mouth scaling and root planing (FM-SRP) in two sessions within 24 hours with quadrant-wise scaling and root planing (Q-SRP) in four sessions within 4-6 weeks and evaluate (I) clinical outcome, (II) treatment efficiency, and (III) treatment discomfort of patients and therapists. Twenty individuals, aged 28-65 years, with severe chronic periodontitis were randomly assigned to treatment with FM-SRP or Q-SRP. At baseline and after 6 months, there were no between-group differences in clinical findings, treatment discomfort, or post-treatment body temperature. The therapists, however, felt that FM-SRP was more physically and psychologically demanding than Q-SRP. Mean effective scaling and root planing (SRP) time was 165.5 min during the two FM-SRP sessions and 202.1 min during the four Q-SRP sessions. FM-SRP's initial time savings of 36.6 min compared with Q-SRP diminished to 30.8 min at the 6-month follow-up due to rescaling needs. Total mean treatment time (comprising SRP and patient reinformation and reinstruction in oral hygiene) during the first 6 months post-treatment was 321.2 min for FM-SRP and 353.0 min for Q-SRP. Thus, mean savings in total treatment time with FM-SRP was 31.8 min compared with Q-SRP. In conclusion, this study found that both treatment modalities may be recommended for chronic periodontitis patients. Although time saving is possible with FM-SRP,the modality may compromise the therapist's well-being if practiced frequently due to the risk of musculoskeletal problems.
这项随机临床研究的目的是比较在24小时内分两次进行的全口洁治和根面平整(FM-SRP)与在4至6周内分四次进行的象限洁治和根面平整(Q-SRP),并评估(I)临床结果、(II)治疗效率以及(III)患者和治疗师的治疗不适情况。20名年龄在28至65岁之间的重度慢性牙周炎患者被随机分配接受FM-SRP或Q-SRP治疗。在基线和6个月后,两组在临床检查结果、治疗不适或治疗后体温方面均无差异。然而,治疗师认为FM-SRP在身体和心理上比Q-SRP要求更高。在两次FM-SRP治疗过程中,平均有效洁治和根面平整(SRP)时间为165.5分钟,在四次Q-SRP治疗过程中为202.1分钟。与Q-SRP相比,FM-SRP最初节省的36.6分钟时间在6个月随访时因重新洁治的需要而减少至30.8分钟。治疗后前6个月的总平均治疗时间(包括SRP以及患者口腔卫生再宣教),FM-SRP为321.2分钟,Q-SRP为353.0分钟。因此,与Q-SRP相比,FM-SRP在总治疗时间上平均节省31.8分钟。总之,本研究发现这两种治疗方式均可推荐给慢性牙周炎患者。虽然FM-SRP有可能节省时间,但由于存在肌肉骨骼问题的风险,如果频繁实施,这种方式可能会影响治疗师的健康。