Podshadley A G, Storey R
Department of Reconstructive Dentistry, University of Louisville, School of Dentistry, Ky.
J Prosthet Dent. 1991 Jan;65(1):68-70. doi: 10.1016/0022-3913(91)90051-w.
The force required to remove self-threading retention pins from dentin when the holes were drilled with two different methods was determined. The two methods employed to drill the holes were (1) using a conventional slow-speed contra-angle handpiece and (2) using a 10-to-1 gear reduction contra-angle handpiece attached to a conventional slow-speed handpiece. Also determined were the number of drills broken in the process of drilling the holes. Results demonstrated no difference in the retention of pins placed in holes drilled using these two methods. Two drills were broken in the process of drilling well over 100 holes, and both breaks occurred with the gear-reduced handpiece. Either of the two methods tested is acceptable, but we recommended using a conventional slow-speed contra-angle handpiece because of the ease of producing the holes.
测定了用两种不同方法钻孔时从牙本质中取出自攻固位钉所需的力。用于钻孔的两种方法是：（1）使用传统的低速反角手机；（2）使用连接到传统低速手机上的10:1减速反角手机。还测定了钻孔过程中折断的钻头数量。结果表明，用这两种方法钻孔后置入的钉子固位力没有差异。在钻100多个孔的过程中有两根钻头折断，且两次折断均发生在使用减速手机时。所测试的两种方法中的任何一种都是可以接受的，但我们建议使用传统的低速反角手机，因为钻孔更容易。
