Shanghai Key Laboratory of Stomatology, Department of Prosthodontics, Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
J Prosthodont. 2017 Jun;26(4):267-274. doi: 10.1111/jopr.12463. Epub 2016 Feb 24.
Many procedures are used to construct traditional (T) complete dentures; however, a simplified (S) method requiring fewer steps and less time is available. This systematic review intends to summarize the modeling of simplified methods for complete dentures and evaluate the differences between the T method and S method. With this review, we hope to lay the foundation for proposing a standardized fabrication method for "simplified dentures."
The MEDLINE (via PubMed) and EMBASE databases were searched for articles on simplified complete dentures published in English before April 2014. Eleven articles were included. One was about one-step complete dentures, two were about SET (simplified treatment of edentulous patients), and the others were about the normal simplified method, which includes impression, occlusal registration, and try-in. Seven were randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs). The time, cost, patient satisfaction, clinical effects, masticatory performance, masticatory ability, and professional evaluation reported in these studies were compared.
We summarized the different techniques of fabricating complete dentures and discussed the RCTs of the normal complete technique. None of the RCTs identified significant differences between the S and T groups in terms of patient ratings for general satisfaction, OHIP-edentulous scale, denture quality, or masticatory ability. At the same time, the T method was significantly more expensive and required more time to complete than the S method.
Current scientific evidence suggests that the S method can replace or partly replace the T method. Moreover, specific rules should be devised to restrict the simplified construction, and detailed research should be conducted.
有许多方法可用于制作传统(T)全口义齿;然而,简化(S)方法所需步骤和时间更少。本系统综述旨在总结全口义齿简化方法的模型,并评估 T 法与 S 法之间的差异。通过本综述,我们希望为提出“简化义齿”的标准化制作方法奠定基础。
检索了 2014 年 4 月前发表的英文简化全口义齿的 MEDLINE(通过 PubMed)和 EMBASE 数据库。纳入了 11 篇文章。一篇是关于一步法全口义齿,两篇是关于 SET(简化无牙颌患者治疗),其余的是关于正常简化方法,包括印模、咬合记录和试戴。七篇为随机对照临床试验(RCT)。比较了这些研究中报告的时间、成本、患者满意度、临床效果、咀嚼性能、咀嚼能力和专业评价。
我们总结了制作全口义齿的不同技术,并讨论了正常全口技术的 RCT。在一般满意度、OHIP-无牙颌量表、义齿质量或咀嚼能力方面,没有 RCT 发现 S 组和 T 组之间存在显著差异。同时,T 法明显比 S 法昂贵,且完成所需时间更长。
目前的科学证据表明,S 法可以替代或部分替代 T 法。此外,应该制定具体的规则来限制简化构造,并进行详细的研究。