Suppr超能文献

临时治疗修复方法与全身麻醉下治疗方法。

Interim therapeutic restoration approach versus treatment under general anaesthesia approach.

机构信息

Ministry of Health Holdings, Singapore, Singapore.

Discipline of Orthodontics and Paediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.

出版信息

Int J Paediatr Dent. 2017 Nov;27(6):551-557. doi: 10.1111/ipd.12296. Epub 2017 Mar 5.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Although dental treatment under general anaesthesia (GA) remains the long-established approach for treating anxious children, treatment under GA presents with increased risks, costs and parental acceptability issues. Interim therapeutic restoration (ITR) has been proposed as an alternative approach.

AIM

To compare the incidence and types of failures between children managed with the ITR approach and those managed under GA within 12 months of treatment completion.

DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study of children who received dental treatment utilizing the ITR approach was compared to children treated under GA. Age, gender and dental disease matching was done. Statistical analyses were carried out with Independent t-test and chi-square analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 132 children (GA = 66, ITR = 66) were included, and the groups did not differ in terms of initial age, sex, dmft and initial behaviour score. ITR group had a significantly higher rate (P < 0.001; 95% CI: [0.21 to 0.97]) of restorative failure and visits required when compared to the GA group. There were no difference for incidence of pain (P = 0.55; 95% CI: [-0.074 to 0.10]) and behaviour scores (P = 0.46) between the two groups at the 12-month visit.

CONCLUSIONS

ITR approach may be a viable alternative to the GA approach when treating paediatric dental patients.

摘要

背景

尽管全身麻醉下的牙科治疗(GA)仍然是治疗焦虑儿童的既定方法,但 GA 治疗存在风险增加、成本增加和家长接受度问题。临时治疗修复(ITR)已被提议作为替代方法。

目的

比较在治疗完成后 12 个月内,采用 ITR 方法治疗的儿童与接受 GA 治疗的儿童之间的失败发生率和类型。

设计

对接受 ITR 治疗的儿童和接受 GA 治疗的儿童进行回顾性队列研究。进行年龄、性别和牙科疾病匹配。采用独立 t 检验和卡方分析进行统计分析。

结果

共纳入 132 名儿童(GA = 66,ITR = 66),两组在初始年龄、性别、dmft 和初始行为评分方面无差异。与 GA 组相比,ITR 组的修复失败率和所需就诊次数明显更高(P < 0.001;95%CI:[0.21 至 0.97])。两组在 12 个月就诊时的疼痛发生率(P = 0.55;95%CI:[-0.074 至 0.10])和行为评分(P = 0.46)无差异。

结论

在治疗儿科牙科患者时,ITR 方法可能是 GA 方法的可行替代方法。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验