Lira-Oetiker M, Seguel-Galdames F, Quero-Vallejos I, Uribe S E
School of Dentistry, Universidad Austral de Chile, Valdivia, Chile.
J Oral Rehabil. 2018 May;45(5):386-392. doi: 10.1111/joor.12617. Epub 2018 Mar 9.
To clinically evaluate the patient satisfaction and associated costs of dentures made using a simplified procedure that eliminates assembly on the articulator and dentures made with the conventional technique. Single-blind randomised clinical trial. Forty edentulous patients were randomly divided into 2 groups. One group received dentures made using the conventional method (CG), and the other using a simplified technique (SG) that omits the use of functional impressions (with modelling compound and ZOE impression paste) and an articulator to assemble the models. Overall patient satisfaction was assessed at 3 and 6 months by means of a Numerical Rating Scale (NRS). The comparisons were made using a repeated measures ANOVA (P = .05). No significant differences were found in terms of the satisfaction stated by the patients or the quality of the prosthesis evaluated by a professional among the dentures made using the traditional (n = 17) and simplified (n = 21) techniques. The rehabilitation of an edentulous patient with a simplified technique for the preparation of a total prosthesis is a feasible, more economical alternative and accepted by most patients.
为临床评估使用简化程序制作的假牙（该程序省去了在牙合架上的组装步骤）与使用传统技术制作的假牙的患者满意度及相关成本。单盲随机临床试验。40例无牙颌患者被随机分为2组。一组接受使用传统方法制作的假牙（CG组），另一组接受使用简化技术制作的假牙（SG组），该简化技术省去了使用功能性印模（用模型膏和氧化锌丁香酚印模膏）以及牙合架来组装模型的步骤。在3个月和6个月时通过数字评分量表（NRS）评估患者总体满意度。使用重复测量方差分析进行比较（P = 0.05）。在使用传统技术（n = 17）和简化技术（n = 21）制作的假牙之间，患者表示的满意度或专业人员评估的假体质量方面均未发现显著差异。用简化技术为无牙颌患者制作全口义齿进行修复是一种可行、更经济的选择，并且为大多数患者所接受。
