Suppr超能文献

两种预涂胶托槽系统的临床粘接失败率和粘接时间比较。

Comparison of clinical bond failure rates and bonding times between two adhesive precoated bracket systems.

机构信息

Department of Orthodontics, Dicle University, Diyarbakir, Turkey.

Department of Orthodontics, Dicle University, Diyarbakir, Turkey.

出版信息

Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2019 Apr;155(4):523-528. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2018.12.010.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare the clinical bracket failure rate and bonding time differences between Adhesive Precoated Flash-Free (APCF) and Adhesive Precoated Plus (APCP) bracket systems.

METHODS

Thirty-three patients (7 male and 26 female) with a mean age of 17.2 ± 3.6 years and permanent dentition were included in the study. Total of 660 brackets were bonded by 1 operator with the use of a split-mouth design, and bracket failure rates were observed over 6 months. Bracket bonding time of each group was also evaluated. Bracket failure rates were evaluated by means of chi-square test. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey honestly significant difference tests were used to evaluate the bonding time differences between groups.

RESULTS

The overall, APCF, and APCP bracket failure rates were 1.21%, 1.81%, and 1.51%, respectively. Chi-square test revealed significant differences (P <0.01) between groups in bracket failure rates. The upper left APCP group showed significantly (P <0.05) more failure than the other groups. One-way ANOVA test (P <0.001) showed statistically significant bonding time differences between groups. Bonding time of APCF brackets was significantly shorter than the bonding time of APCP brackets for the same quadrants. Chi-square test did not reveal significant differences (P >0.05) between groups according to adhesive remnant index scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with APCP brackets, APCF brackets can reduce the bonding time without increasing bracket failure rate.

摘要

目的

比较自酸蚀预处理型通用型(APCF)和自酸蚀预处理加成型(APCP)托槽系统的临床托槽脱落率和粘接时间差异。

方法

本研究纳入了 33 名年龄在 17.2±3.6 岁的恒牙患者(7 名男性,26 名女性),采用分牙设计,由同一位医生完成 660 个托槽的粘接,观察 6 个月的托槽脱落率。评估每组的托槽粘接时间。采用卡方检验评估托槽脱落率,采用单因素方差分析(ANOVA)和 Tukey Honestly Significant Difference 检验评估组间粘接时间差异。

结果

总的、APCF 和 APCP 托槽的脱落率分别为 1.21%、1.81%和 1.51%。卡方检验显示各组间托槽脱落率存在显著差异(P<0.01)。左上 APCP 组的脱落率显著高于其他组(P<0.05)。单因素方差分析(P<0.001)显示组间的粘接时间存在显著差异。同一象限的 APCF 托槽的粘接时间明显短于 APCP 托槽。卡方检验显示各组间根据残留粘接剂指数评分无显著差异(P>0.05)。

结论

与 APCP 托槽相比,APCF 托槽可以在不增加托槽脱落率的情况下缩短粘接时间。

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