Suppr超能文献

数字化与传统制作间接正畸粘接托盘的总制作时间比较研究

Comparative Study between the Overall Production Time of Digitally Versus Conventionally Produced Indirect Orthodontic Bonding Trays.

作者信息

Plattner Julia, Othman Ahmed, Arnold Jassin, von See Constantin

机构信息

Private practice, Bressanone, Trentino-Alto Adige, Italy.

Department of Digital technologies in dentistry and CAD/CAM, Danube Private University, Krems an der Donau, Austria.

出版信息

Turk J Orthod. 2020 Dec 1;33(4):232-238. doi: 10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2020.18079. eCollection 2020.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare the production time for indirect digitally and laboratory-produced orthodontic bonding trays.

METHODS

Orthodontic study casts were used in this study (n=40). The specimens were equally and randomly divided. In the digitally produced indirect bonding tray (DIBT) group (n=20), the brackets were set virtually using the Orthoanalyzer program (3Shape, Copenhagen, Denmark) to produce an indirect bonding tray that was virtually designed and 3D printed using VarseoWax Splint material with a Varseo S 3D printer (Bego, Bremen, Germany). In the laboratory-produced indirect bonding tray (LIBT) group, the brackets were adhesively bonded to the study casts in the dental laboratory (Danube Private University, Krems, Austria), and a transfer bonding silicone tray was manufactured.

RESULTS

The t-test results showed a significant difference between the passive time during the production of DIBTs (153.8±32.8 min) and LIBTs (7 min). However, the active production time was 13.6±0.8 min for DIBTs and 17.7±1.9 min for LIBTs. Every individual process step in both groups was measured in minutes, and statistical analysis was performed.

CONCLUSION

The total production time, including active working and passive non-working time, was higher for DIBTs than for LIBTs. However, the actual active production time for DIBTs was shorter than that for LIBTs. Within the study limitations, the digital planning and production of indirect orthodontic trays can be considered a time-efficient production method.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在比较间接数字化制作和实验室制作的正畸粘结托槽的生产时间。

方法

本研究使用了正畸研究模型(n = 40)。样本被平均随机分配。在数字化制作的间接粘结托槽(DIBT)组(n = 20)中,使用Orthoanalyzer程序(丹麦哥本哈根的3Shape公司)虚拟设置托槽,以制作一个虚拟设计的间接粘结托槽,并使用Varseo S 3D打印机(德国不来梅的Bego公司)用VarseoWax Splint材料进行3D打印。在实验室制作的间接粘结托槽(LIBT)组中,托槽在牙科实验室(奥地利克雷姆斯多瑙河私立大学)粘结到研究模型上,并制作一个转移粘结硅橡胶托盘。

结果

t检验结果显示,DIBT制作过程中的被动时间(153.8±32.8分钟)与LIBT制作过程中的被动时间(7分钟)之间存在显著差异。然而,DIBT的实际生产时间为13.6±0.8分钟,LIBT的实际生产时间为17.7±1.9分钟。两组中的每个单独工艺步骤均以分钟为单位进行测量,并进行了统计分析。

结论

包括主动工作时间和被动非工作时间在内,DIBT的总生产时间比LIBT长。然而,DIBT的实际主动生产时间比LIBT短。在研究限制范围内,间接正畸托盘的数字化规划和生产可被视为一种高效的生产方法。

相似文献

本文引用的文献

8
The Burton approach to indirect bonding.
J Orthod. 2001 Dec;28(4):267-70. doi: 10.1093/ortho/28.4.267.

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