Suppr超能文献

弹性辅助材料与弹力线用于前磨牙拔牙位点关闭的比较:一项体内研究

A comparison of elastomeric auxiliaries versus elastic thread on premolar extraction site closure: an in vivo study.

作者信息

Sonis A L, Van der Plas E, Gianelly A

出版信息

Am J Orthod. 1986 Jan;89(1):73-8. doi: 10.1016/0002-9416(86)90115-6.

Abstract

Twenty-five patients requiring symmetric premolar extractions (representing eighty quadrants requiring canine retraction) were entered into the study. Standard 0.022 X 0.028-inch Siamese edgewise appliances with 0.016 X 0.022-inch arch wires were used during canine retraction. In 30 of the quadrants, canine retraction was accomplished with Unitek Alastik chain; 10 quadrants were treated with Rocky Mountain energy chain (medium). In the remaining 40 groups, canine retraction was accomplished via Unitek nylon-covered latex thread. The forces initially applied to the system were between 350-400 grams. Patients were seen at 3-week intervals to measure the amount of space closure and to change the elastic modules. A comparison among the three groups revealed no significant differences in rates of canine retraction (P less than 0.05). Empirically, the elastomeric auxiliaries were found to be more hygienic and required less chair time to apply than did the elastic thread.

摘要

25名需要对称拔除前磨牙(代表80个需要内收尖牙的象限)的患者进入了该研究。在尖牙内收期间,使用了带有0.016×0.022英寸弓丝的标准0.022×0.028英寸暹罗方丝弓矫治器。在30个象限中,使用Unitek Alastik链完成尖牙内收;10个象限使用Rocky Mountain能量链(中等型号)进行治疗。在其余40组中,通过Unitek尼龙覆盖乳胶线完成尖牙内收。最初施加于该系统的力在350 - 400克之间。每隔3周对患者进行检查,以测量间隙关闭量并更换弹性组件。三组之间的比较显示,尖牙内收速率无显著差异(P小于0.05)。根据经验发现,与弹性线相比,弹性辅助装置更卫生,应用所需的诊疗椅时间更少。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验